Visual statistical learning and integration of perceptual priors are intact in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Abstract Deficits in statistical learning and predictive processing could in principle explain inattention and distractibility in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). To test this, we evaluated whether adults diagnosed with ADHD ( n = 17) differed from controls ( n = 30) in implicitly learning and using low-level perceptual priors to guide sensory processing. We used a visual statistical learning task in which participants had to estimate the direction of coherently moving dots. Unbeknown to the participants, two directions were more frequently presented than the others, creating an implicit bias (prior) towards those directions. This task had previously revealed differences in autistic spectrum disorder and schizophrenia. Both groups acquired the prior expectations for the most frequent directions and, except for some subtle differences over time, there were no group difference in how much the priors influenced performance. This suggests that ADHD symptoms do not stem from difficulties in developing and/or using perceptual priors. Statement of Relevance Schizophrenia, autistic spectrum disorder (ASD), and more recently anxiety and depression have all been described in terms of disturbances in predictive coding or Bayesian inference – a general mechanism for how incoming sensory information is integrated with prior knowledge and how such prior knowledge is learnt. In theory, Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is also associated with a range of sensory processing differences that could be understood within the Bayesian inference framework. However, to our knowledge, there has been no experimental work explicitly testing differences in Bayesian inference in ADHD so far. Here we found the acquisition and use of the low-level perceptual priors to be intact in ADHD, compared to controls. Our study shows for the first time that the learning and use of low-level Bayesian priors are not impaired in ADHD, contrary to what has been described in other neurodevelopmental disorders.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Individuals with ADHD maintained intact statistical learning on decision tasks similar to healthy controls.
“but maintained intact statistical learning on decision tasks similar to HC (Richards et al., 2020).”
From Predictive coding in neuropsychiatric disorders: a systematic transdiagnostic review. (2025) · cites this paper as Richards et al., 2020
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 72 · Cited by 12
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- [53]Kooij JJS. Adult ADHD: Diagnostic assessment and treatment. London: Springer; 2012.
- [58]Lee MD, Wagenmakers EJ. Bayesian data analysis for cognitive science: A practical course. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2013.
- Authors
- Richards, K. L., Karvelis, P., Lawrie, S. M., & Seriès, P.
- Affiliations
- King's College London (GB)
- University of Edinburgh (GB)
- Royal Edinburgh Hospital (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Seriès, Peggy
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2020-12-17
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- e0243100
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC7746270
- OpenAlex
- W3111270671
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 72
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2
- FWCI
- 0.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Sunovion
- H. Lundbeck A/S
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Keywords
- attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, visual statistical learning, perceptual priors, predictive processing, Bayesian inference, implicit learning, inattention, motion direction estimation, hyperactivity
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Bayes Theorem, Female, Humans, Learning, Learning Disabilities, Male, Middle Aged, Visual Perception, Case-Control Studies, Young Adult
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review