ADHD MULTI-GENRE RESEARCH

ADHD Multi-Genre Research



Table of Contents

Introduction3

Demographic Characteristics of Participants3

Procedure4

Tests Administered4

Psychiatric feigning measure5

Scoring, Data Entry, and Analysis5

Manipulation Checks6

Data Analysis6

Results and Findings7

ADHD Measures7

The Poem7

Discussion and Conclusion11

References13

ADHD Multi-Genre Research

Introduction

Since awareness has grown that learning disorders can disrupt postsecondary education, young-adult student's increasingly present requesting evaluation and treatment for suspected learning problems. Significant motivations and incentives currently exist for young adults seeking a diagnosis of a learning disorder, including attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), within higher education facilities Laws including the Individuals With Disabilities Act, the Rehabilitation Act of 1983, and the Americans With Disabilities Act provide the legal basis guaranteeing students with disabilities, including mental disabilities, provision for academic accommodation and resources (McGuire, 1998).

Demographic Characteristics of Participants

On the basis of ADHD Rating Scale (Smith, 1997) and Conners's Adult ADHD Rating Scale) symptom reports presented in detail below, the ADHD group was predominantly combined subtype (75%), with less inattentive subtype (>20%) and hyperactive-impulsive subtype (<5%). The majority of ADHD students (41%) reported having been diagnosed through a brief neuropsychological assessment (including psychological, IQ, and learning-disability testing); while 31% had received a full neuropsychological evaluation and 21% had received a comprehensive psychological evaluation including corroborative interviews of parents and teachers. Most students were currently prescribed medication (82.3%), typically Adderall (57.8%).

Procedure

All procedures and an informed-consent document were approved by the local institutional review board. Students in the ADHD group, who came in following a 12-hr medication washout period, were asked to take a battery of counterbalanced tests and questionnaires to the best of their ability. Students with no history of ADHD were randomly assigned to the HON or FGN conditions by selecting from two envelopes with enclosed role-specific information. As previously noted, fewer HON control group participants (14) were sought because this group served only as a manipulation check to ensure that presumably normal students would not achieve clinical profiles and, by comparison, that FGN participants followed their instructions.

Tests Administered

All groups completed the following self-report inventories, a psychiatric malingering interview, neuropsychological measures, SVTs, and a posttest debriefing form requesting reproduction of instructions and ratings of compliance with instructions. As previously noted, medicated ADHD participants were asked not to take their medication during the 12 hr before testing and to complete self-report inventories with regard to how they feel when not on this medicine.

Psychiatric feigning measure

The Digit Memory Test (Smith, 1997) is considered by many to be the gold standard of neuro-cognitive feigning tools when evaluating neurological patients. Meta-analytic reviews have suggested that the DMT exhibits the strongest sensitivity of all measures reviewed, as well as very high specificity (Vickery, Berry, Inman, Harris, & Ore; 2001). The Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM; Tombaugh, 1997) is another forced-choice measure that has demonstrated good ability to differentiate feigning from no feigning and is perhaps the most commonly used SVT within the clinical context (McGuire, 1998)

Scoring, Data Entry, and Analysis

All measures were scored according to standardized instructions. Scoring and data entry were independently cross-checked for accuracy by two individuals at the conclusion of data ...