Methylphenidate Improves Stroop Naming Speed, But Not Response Interference, in Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to investigate the effect of methylphenidate (MPH) on response interference, as measured by the Stoop Color and Word Test, in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Response interference is a core component of response inhibition that has been shown to be impaired in children with ADHD. METHODS: A clinic-referred sample of school-aged children with a confirmed Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.) diagnosis of ADHD and good reading skills (n = 31) completed the Stroop Color and Word Test in an acute, randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover trial with three single fixed doses of MPH. RESULTS: MPH did not improve response interference on the Stroop Color and Word Test but did significantly improve color naming and word naming abilities. CONCLUSION: Response interference, as measured by the Stroop Color and Word Test, is not improved by MPH in children with ADHD. In addition, findings demonstrate strongly positive MPH effects on the highly effortful process of color naming, which has previously been demonstrated as impaired in children with ADHD. MPH was also shown to have a positive but smaller effect on word naming speed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it