Association Between Auditory and Visual Continuous Performance Tests in Students With ADHD

2016 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 635-640 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sergio Luís Schmidt ◽  
Eunice do Nascimento Simões ◽  
Ana Lúcia Novais Carvalho

Objective: Continuous Performance Tests (CPTs) are known to measure inattention and impulsivity in students with ADHD. Many CPTs utilize a visual format. It is accepted that auditory tasks reflect attentional demand more closely in the classroom. Thus, the association between deficits found by auditory and visual CPTs needs to be studied. We hypothesized that impulsivity would be dependent on sensory modality and inattention would be a unitary cross-modal construct. Method: Forty-four students with ADHD performed two CPTs (visual and auditory). We analyzed correlations between the variables examined by the two tasks. Results: There were strong correlations between variables measuring inattention. Correlations between auditory and visual measures of impulsivity were weak. Conclusion: Inattention is partially independent of modality. In contrast, response inhibition is modality-specific. Although ADHD is defined regardless of modality, hyperactive students may exhibit deficits in the auditory modality but not in the visual modality or vice versa.

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 293-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hagai Maoz ◽  
Shai Aviram ◽  
Uri Nitzan ◽  
Aviv Segev ◽  
Yuval Bloch

Objective: The study of ADHD uses various computerized tests to assess cognitive functions. Uncertainty exists regarding the association between deficits found by different tools testing similar or different cognitive functions (e.g., continuous performance tests [CPT] and response inhibition [RI] tests).We hypothesized that different tools that measure continuous performance will be better correlated between themselves than with a tool that examines RI. Method: Thirty-six adults with ADHD performed two different CPTs and a RI task. We analyzed correlations between different measures examined by the tasks. Results: There were strong correlations between corresponding measures in the CPTs. Correlations between the results in CPT and the RI task were only minimal. Conclusion: These findings support the specificity of impairments in different cognitive domains (continuous attention vs. RI) beyond the specific test used in the study of ADHD. Also, these findings strengthen the importance of specific discriminative cognitive domains in ADHD.


2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eunice N. Simões ◽  
Ana L. Novais Carvalho ◽  
Sergio L. Schmidt

Objective: Continuous performance tests (CPTs) usually utilize visual stimuli. A previous investigation showed that inattention is partially independent of modality, but response inhibition is modality-specific. Here we aimed to compare performance on visual and auditory CPTs in ADHD and in healthy controls. Method: The sample consisted of 160 elementary and high school students (43 ADHD, 117 controls). For each sensory modality, five variables were extracted: commission errors (CEs) and omission errors (OEs), reaction time (RT), variability of reaction time (VRT), and coefficient of variability (CofV = VRT / RT). Results: The ADHD group exhibited higher rates for all test variables. The discriminant analysis indicated that auditory OE was the most reliable variable for discriminating between groups, followed by visual CE, auditory CE, and auditory CofV. Discriminant equation classified ADHD with 76.3% accuracy. Conclusion: Auditory parameters in the inattention domain (OE and VRT) can discriminate ADHD from controls. For the hyperactive/impulsive domain (CE), the two modalities are equally important.


1981 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 351-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula Tallal ◽  
Rachel Stark ◽  
Clayton Kallman ◽  
David Mellits

A battery of nonverbal perceptual and memory tests were given to 35 language-impaired (LI) and 38 control subjects. Three modalities of tests were given: auditory, visual, and cross-modal (auditory and visual). The purpose was to reexamine some nonverbal perceptual and memory abilities of LI children as a function of age and modality of stimulation. Results failed to replicate previous findings of a temporal processing deficit that is specific to the auditory modality in LI children. The LI group made significantly more errors than did controls regardless of modality of stimulation when 2-item sequences were presented rapidly, or when more than two stimuli were presented in series. However, further analyses resolved this apparent conflict between the present and earlier studies by demonstrating that age is an important variable underlying modality specificity of perceptual performance in LI children. Whereas younger LI children were equally impaired when responding to stimuli presented rapidly to the auditory and visual modality, older LI subjects made nearly twice as many errors responding to rapidly presented auditory rather than visual stimuli. This developmental difference did not occur for the control group.


2015 ◽  
Vol 32 ◽  
pp. 40-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darcey M. Allan ◽  
Nicholas P. Allan ◽  
Matthew D. Lerner ◽  
Amber L. Farrington ◽  
Christopher J. Lonigan

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew W. Bismark ◽  
Michael L. Thomas ◽  
Melissa Tarasenko ◽  
Alexandra L. Shiluk ◽  
Sonia Y. Rackelmann ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document