Exploring neuropsychological effects of a self-monitoring intervention for ADHD-symptoms in school

Figures & data

Table 1. Age, IQ, and neuropsychological test scores.

S	Age (year;months)	TIQ	VIQ	PIQ	PS	Digitspan^a	Auditoryattention totalcorrect^b	Responseset totalcorrect^b	Inhibitiontotalerrors^b	Inhibition - namingself-correctederrors^b	Inhibition - inhibitionself-correctederrors^b	Inhibition - shiftingself-correctederrors^b
1	10:00	89.0	88.0	92.0	91.0	6^d	≥76	51–75	26–50	11–25	2–5^d	11–25
2	9:05	^c	94.0	71.0	65.0	5^d	≥76	11–25	51–75	≥51	≥76	26–50
3	11:06	95.0	99.0	91.0	83.0	9	≥76	<2^d	51–75	≥51	51–75	≥76
4	11:10	^c	91.0	71.0	75.0	6^d	≥76	6–10^d	11–25	2–5^d	26–50	6–10^d
5	9:09	98.0	105.0	92.0	–	6^d	≥76	26–50	26–50	11–25	≥76	2–5^d
6	12:00	98.0	102.0	94.0	94.0	7	≥76	11–25	51–75	6–10^d	51–75	26–50
7	9:09	95.0	97.0	94.0	91.0	9	≥76	<2^d	26–50	11–25	26–50	26–50
M (SD)	10.10 (1.20)	95.0 (3.7)	96.6 (6.0)	86.4 (10.6)	83.2 (11.3)

Note. S = Student; TIQ = Total IQ; VIQ = Verbal IQ; PIQ: Performance IQ; PS = Processing speed.

^a Standardized W score (M = 10, SD = 3).

^b Standardized P-score (M = 50, SD = 34).

^c Missing score because of verbal-performance discrepancy;

^d Low or very low score.

Table 2. Diagnoses ADHD, medication, and scores on DBD according to teachers and parents.

Stud.	Diagnosis	Medication	DBD teacher AD	DBD teacher H/I	DBD parents AD	DBD parents H/I
1	Yes	Methylphenidate	Clinical	Subclinical	Clinical	Clinical
2	No	None	Clinical	Average	Average	Average
3	Yes	None	Subclinical	Average	Clinical	Subclinical
4	No	None	Clinical	Clinical	Subclinical	Subclinical
5	Yes	Methylphenidate	Clinical	Clinical	Average	Average
6	Yes	Methylphenidate	Subclinical	Clinical	Average	Average
7	Yes	Dexamphetamine	Clinical	Clinical	Clinical	Clinical

Note. DBD = disruptive behavior disorder rating scale; AD = attention deficit; H/I = hyperactive/impulsive.

Table 3. Explanation scoring possibilities observation form off-task behavior.

Category	Explanation
Looking around	The student is gazing around the classroom
Playing with objects	The student is manipulating an object or body part (like hair) that has nothing to do with the learning activity
Peer interaction	The student is initiating contact or responding (verbally or physically) to another student without permission
Out of seat	The student's weight is not being supported by the chair

Figure 1. Procedure for every week during the study.

Figure 2. Percentage off-task behavior per time period by observations (raw data points are in Figure A1 of Appendix A).

Table 4 . Means, standard deviations, and GLM-repeated measures test results of observations of off-task behavior (in %) and teacher ratings of on-task behavior (score 1–5)¹.

	Baseline (SD)	Intervention (SD)	Post intervention (SD)	F	df	Sig.	η^2p
Total	46.8 (11.2)	27.3 (7.4)	23.6 (10.9)	20.8	2	<0.001*	0.776
Look around	28.8 (10.5)	15.3 (6.2)	13.3 (6.8)	22.9	2	<0.001*	0.793
Objects	13.4 (7.0)	6.0 (3.9)	6.1 (4.9)	7.6	2	0.007*	0.560
Peer interaction^a	13.1 (10.3)	7.3 (4.6)	5.1 (4.1)	3.1	1.011	0.129	0.340
Seat	2.0 (1.1)	1.3 (0.8)	0.5 (0.6)	6.8	2	0.011*	0.529
Teacher ratings	3.2 (0.8)	4.0 (0.5)	4.1 (0.3)	13.8	2	0.001*	0.697

Note. ^aGreenhouse-Geiser used due to violation of assumption of sphericity.

* α = 0.05.

¹One of the teachers mentioned that one of the children did not receive his medication on one of the days in the postintervention period, and therefore his behavior differed from normal. The scores of this child for this day are not included in the GLM-repeated measures. This correction led to a small difference in F value, but no difference in p value.

Figure 3. Teacher ratings of on-task behavior for all students per time period.

Table 5. Pre–post comparisons of neuropsychological test scores.

	Pre (SD)	Post (SD)	t	df	Sig.	Cohens d^a
Digit span	10.0 (1.4)	10.9 (2.3)	−.891	6	.407	−.470
Digit span forward	6.00 (0.8)	6.00 (1.3)	0	6	1	0
Digit span backwards	4.00 (1.0)	4.86 (1.2)	−1.867	6	.111	−.774
AA total correct	29.3 (1.3)	29.6 (0.8)	−1.549	6	.172	−.082
RS total correct	28.0 (4.9)	30.1 (4.7)	−1.343	6	.228	−.437
I total incorrect	14.6 (6.8)	8.9 (5.8)	7.071	6	<.001*	2.623
I-naming self-corrected incorrect	1.6 (1.1)	0.4 (0.8)	2.489	6	.047*	1.238
I-inhibition self-corrected incorrect	2.1 (2.8)	1.9 (1.3)	.258	6	.805	.090
I-shifting self-corrected incorrect	5.0 (3.2)	5.0 (3.5)	0	6	1	0

Note. AA: auditory attention; RS: response set; I: Inhibition. ^aCalculated based on Equation 9 of Lakens (2013).

* α = 0.05.

Figure A1. Percentage off-task behavior per time point per student by observations, divided by classroom (B: Baseline, i: intervention, Pi: Post intervention).

Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 863.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar