Gaze pursuit and arm control of adolescent males diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and normal controls: evidence of a dissociation in processing visual information of short and long duration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three-dimensional kinematic analysis of line of gaze, arm and ball was used to describe the visual and motor behaviour of male adolescents diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The ADHD participants were tested when both on (ADHD-On) and off (ADHD-Off) their medication and compared to age-matched normal controls in a modified table tennis task that required tracking the ball and hitting to cued right and left targets. Long-duration information was provided by a pre-cue, in which the target was illuminated approximately 2 s before the serve, and short-duration information by an early-cue illuminated about 350 ms after the serve, leaving approximately 500 ms to select the target and perform the action. The ADHD groups differed significantly from the control group in both the pre-cue and early-cue conditions in being less accurate, in having a later onset and duration of pursuit tracking, and a higher frequency of gaze on and off the ball. The use of medication significantly reduced the gaze frequency of the ADHD participants, but surprisingly this did not lead to an increase in pursuit tracking, suggesting a barrier was reached beyond which ball flight information could not be processed. The control and ADHD groups did not differ in arm movement onset, duration and velocity in the short-duration early-cue condition; in the long-duration pre-cue condition, however, the ADHD group's movement time onset and arm velocity differed significantly from controls. The results show that the ADHD groups were able to process short-duration information without experiencing adverse effects on their motor behaviour; however, long-duration information contributed to irregular movement control.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".