Cited by 13Attention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderHemispheric Asymmetry in NeuroscienceNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

A parietal biomarker for ADHD liability: as predicted by the distributed effects perspective model of ADHD

Open access
Hale, T. Sigi, Wiley, Joshua F., Smalley, Susan L., Tung, Kelly L., Kaminsky, Olivia, McGough, James J., Jaini, Ashwin M., Loo, Sandra K.·2015·Frontiers in Psychiatry

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We previously hypothesized that poor task-directed sensory information processing should be indexed by increased weighting of right hemisphere (RH) biased attention and visuo-perceptual brain functions during task operations and have demonstrated this phenotype in ADHD across multiple studies, using multiple methodologies. However, in our recent distributed effects model of ADHD, we surmised that this phenotype is not ADHD specific, but rather more broadly reflective of any circumstance that disrupts the induction and maintenance of an emergent task-directed neural architecture. Under this view, increased weighting of RH-biased attention and visuo-perceptual brain functions is expected to generally index neurocognitive sets that are not optimized for task-directed thought and action, and when durable expressed, liability for ADHD. METHOD: The current study tested this view by examining whether previously identified rightward parietal EEG asymmetry in ADHD was associated with common ADHD characteristics and comorbidities [i.e., ADHD risk factors (RFs)]. RESULTS: Barring one exception (non-right handedness), we found that it was. Rightward parietal asymmetry (RPA) was associated with carrying the DRD4-7R risk allele, being male, having mood disorder, and having anxiety disorder. However, differences in the specific expression of RPA were observed, which are discussed in relation to possible unique mechanisms underlying ADHD liability in different ADHD RFs. CONCLUSION: Rightward parietal asymmetry appears to be a durable feature of ADHD liability, as predicted by the Distributed Effects Perspective Model of ADHD. Moreover, variability in the expression of this phenotype may shed light on different sources of ADHD liability.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyt.2015.00063

Cites

154 of 154 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [25]Hale TS Smalley SL Walshaw PD Hanada G Macion J McCracken JT Atypical EEG beta asymmetry in adults with ADHD. Neuropsychologia (2010) 48(12): 3532– 9. 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.08.002 20705076 PMC2965023 · DOI
  2. [109]Zaidel E, editor. Language, dichotic listening and the disconnected hemispheres. Conference on Human Brain Function Los Angeles, CA: BRI Publications Office, UCLA (1976).
  3. [127]Bryden MP MacRae L Dichotic laterality effects obtained with emotional words. Neuropsychiatry Neuropsychol Behav Neurol (1989) 1(3): 171– 6.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hale, T. S., Wiley, J. F., Smalley, S. L., Tung, K. L., Kaminsky, O., McGough, J. J., Jaini, A. M., & Loo, S. K.
Affiliations
University of California, Los Angeles (US)
Corresponding author
Hale, T. Sigi
Venue
Frontiers in Psychiatry
Published
2015-05-07
Volume
6
Pages
63-63
ISSN
1664-0640 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1805034177
Cited by
13
References
154
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 2
FWCI
1.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Bank (Australian Catholic University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Bank (Australian Catholic University) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH058277, MH058277, R00MH082104, K99MH082104, MH082104)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS054124)
  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K23HD040275)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hemispheric Asymmetry in Neuroscience
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
EEG asymmetry, ADHD risk factors, comorbidities, mood disorders, anxiety disorders, handedness

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