Search

The triple pathway model suggests that different neuropsychological factors underlie symptoms of inattention (i.e., time, cognition and/or motivation problems). However, screening instruments asking individuals to judge the link between these neuropsychological factors and inattention are lacking. The recently developed screening questionnaire, PASSC, aims to examine these factors possibly causing inattention by asking parents to indicate to what extent their child experiences inattention symptoms and to what extent different neuropsychological factors explain this inattention. The present study extends prior validation research of the PASSC by examining associations between PASSC inattention explained by time, cognition, and/or motivation and children's performance on tests measuring these same three constructs. Results indicated positive correlations between PASSC inattention explained by time and less accurate performance on a time discrimination test, and between PASSC inattention explained by cognition and more working memory errors as well as higher attention switching costs. Furthermore, children whose parents indicated that their inattention was best explained by cognition showed higher switching costs than children whose inattention was best explained by motivation. This support for construct validity of the PASSC is limited to two PASSC explanations (i.e., time, cognition) and a subset of tests (i.e., time discrimination, attention switching, memory span). Future research should focus on integrating PASSC and performance test results to differentiate between children with attention problems but different underlying neuropsychological problems. Concluding, the PASSC can be a promising screening tool to identify inattention in children and the underlying explanation indicated by parents.

To investigate the role of interference control on the development of working memory (WM) capacity, 6-12-year-old children and adults performed an N-Back task with differing WM-load and interference control demands. Correlation analyses between flanker interference scores and WM-load levels showed that interference control was only required in the 2-back condition. While WM maintenance (1-back task) reached adult accuracy levels at age 10-12, the ability to maintain information in WM during distraction (2-back-task) displayed protracted maturation into adolescence. This is suggested to reflect yet immature connections between prefrontal and posterior association areas, respectively involved in interference control and WM storage.