Search

Objective The current diagnostic algorithm for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is not highly predictive of impairment and yields low interrater agreement. The objective of this study was to enhance the diagnostic accuracy of ADHD by identifying the symptoms that are associated with impairment. Method Semistructured interviews and impairment rating scales were administered to parents and teachers of 218 children. Combinations of ADHD symptoms were examined according to a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) based procedure to create diagnostic algorithms that predict impairment. Results In comparison with the DSM-IV, the ROC-based algorithms were 2 to 3 times more efficient in discriminating impaired from nonimpaired children. Parent and teacher agreement was also 3 times higher. Conclusions Limiting the diagnosis to symptoms that predict impairment can increase the validity of the ADHD diagnosis. Results also support the use of ROC analyses in developing better diagnostic algorithms.

Objective To study nonverbal social cue perception in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD; n = 86), conduct problems (CP; n = 24), or both disorders (ADHD+CP; n = 63), as well as normal controls ( n = 27). Method Using a standardized test of receptive nonverbal processing abilities, participants were required to interpret emotional cues from pictures of facial expressions and recordings of voices. Results As predicted, children with CP and ADHD were significantly less accurate at interpreting emotions than normal controls. However, children with CP and ADHD differed in the type of errors made: the ADHD group's errors were generally random in nature, whereas the CP group tended to misinterpret emotions as anger. Contrary to our hypothesis, the ADHD+CP group performed better than the ADHD and CP groups, was as accurate as the control group, and displayed a unique pattern of errors. Conclusions These results support the idea that social deficiencies associated with CP arise from a biased perception of emotion, whereas social problems in ADHD originate from a failure to attend to the appropriate cues of affect. The findings also support the theory that comorbid ADHD+CP is a distinct disorder.

The objective of this study was to determine whether deficient inhibitory control distinguishes children with a diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity (ADHD) disorder, conduct disorder (CD), and comorbid ADHD + CD from normally developing children. Participants were rigorously diagnosed children (age 7 to 12 years) with ADHD (N = 72), CD (N = 13) or ADHD + CD (N = 47) and 33 control children (NC). We studied inhibitory control using the stop-signal paradigm, a laboratory task that assessed the ability to inhibit an ongoing action. The ADHD group had significantly impaired inhibitory control compared to NC, CD, and ADHD + CD children. These results indicate that children with ADHD have deficient inhibition as measured in the stop-signal paradigm and that ADHD occurring in the presence of ADHD + CD may represent a phenocopy of CD rather than a variant of ADHD.

Purpose. To assess the effect of pretrial publicity on mock jurors' post-trial opinions and verdicts, and to investigate the role of the judge's admonition to ignore information obtained outside the trial and the role of asking jurors for their opinions before the trial. Methods. In two studies, university students were exposed to pretrial publicity that was either negative or neutral towards the defendant, a week or more later were shown a videotape of a trial, and asked for their opinions about guilt and their verdicts. In Study 1, with 99 participants, the judge's instruction either did or did not contain a specific admonition to ignore information outside the trial. In Study 2, with 78 participants, pretrial opinions either were or were not solicited. Results. Neither study found any main effect of pretrial publicity. In Study 1, jurors given the specific admonition were less likely to think the defendant was guilty. In Study 2, only when participants were asked for their pretrial opinions of guilt were their post-trial opinions and verdicts significantly affected by negative pretrial publicity. Conclusions. The post-trial effects of pretrial publicity are not strong and robust, but rather appear to depend on other factors in the situation. We interpret the effect of the specific admonition as being due to a leaning-over-backwards phenomenon. We interpret the effect of soliciting pretrial opinions as magnifying the effects of pretrial publicity and producing an overestimate of their strength.