ArticlePeerJ2025
Response inhibition and morphological awareness in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: evidence from behavior and ERPs.
Article in PeerJ, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Response inhibition is an important predictor of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and many studies have shown that phonological awareness is associated with inhibition in native English-speaking children. Unlike English, which is phonetic, Chinese is an ideographic language. In the context of Chinese as a native language, do children with ADHD have deficits in morphological awareness? The present study explored the differences in response inhibition and morphological awareness between children with ADHD and typically developing (TD) children using behavioral data and event-related potentials (ERPs) to verify whether there is a morphological awareness deficit in children with ADHD. Method: Go/No-go task was used to verify the presence of response inhibition deficits in children with ADHD, in which participants were required to respond rapidly to a "Go" stimulus and inhibit responses to a "No-go" stimulus. The Morphological Awareness task was used to verify the presence of a morphological awareness deficit in children with ADHD, in which participants were required to make judgement about true word and pseudo-word. Results: Go/No-go task shows children with ADHD had significantly lower correct No-go stimuli and longer reaction times than TD children, lower evoked N200 amplitudes, and significantly impaired inhibitory control in children with ADHD. The morphological awareness task required participants to recognize pseudo-words and true words, and to respond to pseudo-words. The results showed no difference between the two groups of children in terms of correct response rate, N400 wave amplitude, and latency on the morphological awareness test. Conclusion: The results of the study showed that children with ADHD have deficits in response inhibition compared to TD children and do not have significant deficits in morphological awareness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.