Do children with ADHD and/or PDD-NOS differ in reactivity of alpha/theta ERD/ERS to manipulations of cognitive load and stimulus relevance?

Abstract Objective We examined whether the method of event-related (de-)synchronization (ERD/ERS) revealed differential effects of selective attention and working memory load in children (8–11 years) with pervasive developmental disorder – not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS) or attention-deficit/hyper...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical neurophysiology 2009-01, Vol.120 (1), p.73-79
Hauptverfasser: Gomarus, H. Karin, Wijers, Albertus A, Minderaa, Ruud B, Althaus, Monika
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Objective We examined whether the method of event-related (de-)synchronization (ERD/ERS) revealed differential effects of selective attention and working memory load in children (8–11 years) with pervasive developmental disorder – not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS) or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods Fifteen healthy controls and three equally large groups of children with symptoms of PDD-NOS, ADHD or both (PDD/HD) performed a visual selective memory search task. The EEG was recorded from which occipital alpha and frontal theta were derived. Results The effects of the overall task manipulations of task load, relevance and target/nontarget were clearly present in the overall analyses of alpha and theta ERD/ERS. However, no significant differences with respect to these manipulations existed between any of the subject groups. Conclusions The results supply no evidence for a distinction in information processing abilities of selective attention and working memory as reflected by alpha and theta ERD/ERS between children diagnosed with either ADHD, PDD-NOS or healthy controls. Significance Alpha and theta ERD/ERS are sensitive to manipulations of task load, relevance and target/nontarget, but supply no additional information on possible group differences in comparison to the more frequently used method of event-related potentials.
ISSN:1388-2457
1872-8952
DOI:10.1016/j.clinph.2008.10.017