ArticleEuropean child & adolescent psychiatry2026
Watching reasoning at work: eye movement patterns of participants with ADHD solving Raven´s matrices.
Article in European child & adolescent psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) has been associated with broad cognitive deficits, particularly in tasks regarding working memory and executive control. However, how individuals with ADHD process visual reasoning tasks remains largely unclear. In typically developing (TD) individuals, two main problem-solving strategies have been described for Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices (RSPM): Constructive Matching (CM) is an efficient processing style involving hypothesis generation and integration of relations in working memory, whereas Answer Elimination (AE) is a less demanding trial-and-error approach. This study examined group differences in processing style using eye-tracking during RSPM solving and explored the role of individual cognitive ability in strategy use. Seventy-nine participants (38 ADHD, 41 TD) completed a validated 9-item short form of the RSPM while their eye movements were recorded. Gaze parameters reflecting CM, AE and speed parameters were analyzed. Participants with ADHD showed reduced RSPM accuracy alongside normal CM and adaptation to increasing item difficulty. In this group, furthermore, RSPM item difficulty interacted with Culture Fair Test(CFT)-assessed intelligence such that CM-related adaptation to trial difficulty from easy to medium items (but not medium to hard) was more pronounced in participants with ADHD with higher CFT-assessed intelligence. This association with CFT-assessed intelligence was absent in controls. Our findings suggest that participants with ADHD show normal RSPM processing style (CM and adaptation to varying task demands) despite reduced accuracy and that higher intelligence may improve processing style up to a certain point of task complexity. Our results confirm the assumed compensatory role of intelligence for cognition in ADHD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42517889What 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.