Does Anxiety Enhance or Hinder Attentional and Impulse Control in Youth With ADHD? An ERP Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Youth with ADHD and comorbid anxiety (ADHD+ANX) experience increased social and academic impairment compared with youth with ADHD without anxiety (ADHD). Group differences in attentional and impulse control may underlie this increased impairment. Examination of group differences using behavioral measures of attentional and impulse control has yielded inconsistent findings. This study explored group differences using event-related potentials (ERPs), which provide neural information concerning early information processing. Method: ERPs (early frontal positivity [EFP], N2) were collected while youth aged 11 to 17 with ADHD ( n = 31) and ADHD+ANX ( n = 35) completed a visual and an auditory computer task. Results: Compared with the ADHD group, the ADHD+ANX group exhibited larger N2 amplitudes to no-go stimuli and larger EFP amplitudes to target auditory stimuli, with variable attention allocation to nontarget stimuli. Conclusion: The addition of anxiety to ADHD appears to alter early attentional processing, which may be an important aspect of this comorbidity.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".