4.2 Article

Negation Processing in Children with ADHD: The Generic Problem of Using Negation in Instructions

期刊

JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLINGUISTIC RESEARCH
卷 50, 期 6, 页码 1309-1320

出版社

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s10936-021-09789-w

关键词

Negation; Children; ADHD; Imperatives; Ironic Negation Effects

资金

  1. Projekt DEAL
  2. DFG Heisenberg Program [DU 1505/4-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent studies suggest that negation comprehension relies on inhibitory brain systems crucial for impulse control and other non-linguistic domains. This pilot study found that children generally have longer response delays following negative instructions, with ADHD children showing a more pronounced effect. This indicates that negation processing may require inhibitory control processes that vary across different subgroups.
Recent studies have suggested that negation comprehension falls back onto inhibitory brain systems that are also crucial for impulse control and other non-linguistic control domains (Beltran et al., 2018, 2019; de Vega et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2020). Against this backdrop, the present pilot study investigated the use of negation within directional instructions (i.e., not left, now left, not right, now right) in children with ADHD and a control group. The results indicate that children in general have a long response delay following negative compared to affirmative instructions. Additionally, there was a tendency for this effect to be more pronounced in the ADHD group. Together, these results suggest that negation processing might indeed demand inhibitory control processes, which are differently available across different subgroups. Thus, the current study provides evidence that using negation in imperatives or instructions is generally rather critical and should be avoided if possible, but that negation use is probably even more problematic in specific clinical populations. Potential implications of these results will be discussed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据