Resting-state EEG dynamics help explain differences in response control in ADHD: Insight into electrophysiological mechanisms and sex differences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reductions in response control (greater reaction time variability and commission error rate) are consistently observed in those diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Previous research suggests these reductions arise from a dysregulation of large-scale cortical networks. Here, we extended our understanding of this cortical-network/response-control pathway important to the neurobiology of ADHD. First, we assessed how dynamic changes in three resting-state EEG network properties thought to be relevant to ADHD (phase-synchronization, modularity, oscillatory power) related with response control during a simple perceptual decision-making task in 112 children/adolescents (aged 8-16) with and without ADHD. Second, we tested whether these associations differed in males and females who were matched in age, ADHD-status and ADHD- subtype. We found that changes in oscillatory power (as opposed to phase-synchrony and modularity) are most related with response control, and that this relationship is stronger in ADHD compared to controls. Specifically, a tendency to dwell in an electrophysiological state characterized by high alpha/beta power (8-12/13-30Hz) and low delta/theta power (1-3/4-7Hz) supported response control, particularly in those with ADHD. Time in this state might reflect an increased initiation of alpha-suppression mechanisms, recruited by those with ADHD to suppress processing unfavourable to response control. We also found marginally significant evidence that this relationship is stronger in males compared to females, suggesting a distinct etiology for response control in the female presentation of ADHD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".