Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Department of Cognitive Neurology, Stephanstr, 1A, D-04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Behav Brain Funct. 2007 Aug 20;3:42. doi: 10.1186/1744-9081-3-42.
Contemporary neuropsychological models of ADHD implicate impaired cognitive control as contributing to disorder characteristic behavioral deficiencies and excesses; albeit to varying degrees. While the traditional view of ADHD postulates a core deficiency in cognitive control processes, alternative dual-process models emphasize the dynamic interplay of bottom-up driven factors such as activation, arousal, alerting, motivation, reward and temporal processing with top-down cognitive control. However, neuropsychological models of ADHD are child-based and have yet to undergo extensive empirical scrutiny with respect to their application to individuals with persistent symptoms in adulthood. Furthermore, few studies of adult ADHD samples have investigated two central cognitive control processes: interference control and task-set coordination. The current study employed experimental chronometric Stroop and task switching paradigms to investigate the efficiency of processes involved in interference control and task-set coordination in ADHD adults.
22 adults diagnosed with persistent ADHD (17 males) and 22 matched healthy control subjects performed a manual trial-by-trial Stroop color-word test and a blocked explicitly cued task switching paradigm. Performance differences between neutral and incongruent trials of the Stroop task measured interference control. Task switching paradigm manipulations allowed for measurement of transient task-set updating, sustained task-set maintenance, preparatory mechanisms and interference control. Control analyses tested for the specificity of group x condition interactions.
Abnormal processing of task-irrelevant stimulus features was evident in ADHD group performance on both tasks. ADHD group interference effects on the task switching paradigm were found to be dependent on the time allotted to prepare for an upcoming task. Group differences in sustained task-set maintenance and transient task-set updating were also found to be dependent on experimental manipulation of task preparation processes. With the exception of Stroop task error rates, all analyses revealed generally slower and less accurate ADHD group response patterns.
The current data obtained with experimental paradigms deliver novel evidence of inefficient interference control and task-set coordination in adults with persistent ADHD. However, all group differences observed in these central cognitive control processes were found to be partially dependent on atypical ADHD group task preparation mechanisms and/or response inconsistency. These deficiences may have contributed not only to inefficient cognitive control, but also generally slower and less accurate ADHD group performance. Given the inability to dissociate these impairments with the current data, it remains inconclusive as to whether ineffecient cognitive control in the clinical sample was due to top-down failure or bottom-up engagement thereof. To clarify this issue, future neuropsychological investigations are encouraged to employ tasks with significantly more trials and direct manipulations of bottom-up mechanisms with larger samples.
当代 ADHD 的神经心理学模型表明,认知控制受损是导致该障碍特征性行为缺陷和过度行为的原因之一;尽管程度不同。虽然 ADHD 的传统观点假定认知控制过程存在核心缺陷,但替代的双重过程模型强调了自上而下的认知控制与自下而上驱动的因素(如激活、唤醒、警觉、动机、奖励和时间处理)之间的动态相互作用。然而,ADHD 的神经心理学模型是基于儿童的,并且尚未经过广泛的实证检验,以将其应用于成年后持续存在症状的个体。此外,很少有研究成人 ADHD 样本调查了两个核心认知控制过程:干扰控制和任务设置协调。本研究采用实验计时 Stroop 和任务转换范式来研究 ADHD 成人中涉及干扰控制和任务设置协调的过程效率。
22 名被诊断为持续性 ADHD 的成年人(17 名男性)和 22 名匹配的健康对照组受试者进行了手动逐个trial 的 Stroop 颜色-单词测试和分块明确提示的任务转换范式。Stroop 任务中性和不一致试验之间的绩效差异测量了干扰控制。任务转换范式的操作允许测量瞬态任务集更新、持续任务集维持、预备机制和干扰控制。控制分析测试了组间条件交互的特异性。
ADHD 组在两项任务中的表现均显示出对任务无关刺激特征的异常处理。发现 ADHD 组在任务转换范式上的干扰效应取决于为即将到来的任务做准备的时间分配。还发现持续任务集维持和瞬态任务集更新的组间差异取决于任务准备过程的实验操作。除了 Stroop 任务错误率外,所有分析均显示 ADHD 组的反应模式通常较慢且准确性较低。
本研究采用实验范式获得的新数据表明,持续性 ADHD 成人的干扰控制和任务集协调效率低下。然而,在这些核心认知控制过程中观察到的所有组间差异都被发现部分取决于非典型的 ADHD 组任务准备机制和/或反应不一致。这些缺陷不仅导致认知控制效率低下,而且导致 ADHD 组整体反应较慢且准确性较低。鉴于目前的数据无法将这些缺陷分开,因此仍不确定临床样本中认知控制效率低下是由于自上而下的失败还是自下而上的参与所致。为了澄清这个问题,鼓励未来的神经心理学研究采用具有更多试验的任务,并使用更大的样本直接操作自下而上的机制。