Reward and Punishment Sensitivity in Children with ADHD: Validating the Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire for Children (SPSRQ-C)

This study validates the Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire for children (SPSRQ-C), using a Dutch sample of 1234 children between 6–13 years old. Factor analysis determined that a 4-factor and a 5-factor solution were best fitting, explaining 41% and 50% of the variance respectively. The 4-factor model was highly similar to the original SPSRQ factors found in adults (Punishment Sensitivity, Reward Responsivity, Impulsivity/Fun-Seeking, and Drive). The 5-factor model was similar to the 4-factor model, with the exception of a subdivision of the Punishment Sensitivity factor into a factor with ‘social-fear’ items and a factor with ‘anxiety’ items. To determine external validity, scores of three groups of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) were compared on the EFA models: ADHD-only (n = 34), ADHD and autism spectrum disorder (ADHD+ASD; n = 22), ADHD and oppositional defiant disorder (ADHD+ODD; n = 22). All ADHD groups scored higher than typical controls on Reward Responsivity and on the ‘anxiety’ factor (n = 75). The ADHD-only and ADHD+ODD group scored higher than other groups on Impulsivity/Fun-Seeking and Drive, while the ADHD+ASD group scored higher on Punishment Sensitivity. The findings emphasize the value of the SPSRQ-C to quickly and reliably assess a child’s sensitivity to reinforcement, with the aim to provide individually-tailored behavioral interventions that utilize reward and reprimands

Reward and Punishment Sensitivity in Children with ADHD: Validating the Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire for Children (SPSRQ-C)

This study validates the Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire for children (SPSRQ-C), using a Dutch sample of 1234 children between 6-13 years old. Factor analysis determined that a 4-factor and a 5-factor solution were best fitting, explaining 41% and 50% of the variance respectively. The 4-factor model was highly similar to the original SPSRQ factors found in adults (Punishment Sensitivity, Reward Responsivity, Impulsivity/Fun-Seeking, and Drive). The 5-factor model was similar to the 4-factor model, with the exception of a subdivision of the Punishment Sensitivity factor into a factor with 'social-fear' items and a factor with 'anxiety' items. To determine external validity, scores of three groups of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) were compared on the EFA models: ADHD-only (n = 34), ADHD and autism spectrum disorder (ADHD+ASD; n = 22), ADHD and oppositional defiant disorder (ADHD+ODD; n = 22). All ADHD groups scored higher than typical controls on Reward Responsivity and on the 'anxiety' factor (n = 75). The ADHD-only and ADHD+ODD group scored higher than other groups on Impulsivity/Fun-Seeking and Drive, while the ADHD+ASD group scored higher on Punishment Sensitivity. The findings emphasize the value of the SPSRQ-C to quickly and reliably assess a child's sensitivity to reinforcement, with the aim to provide individually-tailored behavioral interventions that utilize reward and reprimand

Does reward frequency or magnitude drive reinforcement-learning in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder?

Children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) show an impaired ability to use feedback in the context of learning. A stimulus-response learning task was used to investigate whether (1) children with ADHD displayed flatter learning curves, (2) reinforcement-learning in ADHD was sensitive to either reward frequency, magnitude, or both, and (3) altered sensitivity to reward was specific to ADHD or would co-occur in a group of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Performance of 23 boys with ADHD was compared with that of 30 normal controls (NCs) and 21 boys with ASD, all aged 8-12. Rewards were delivered contingent on performance and varied both in frequency (low, high) and magnitude (small, large). The findings showed that, although learning rates were comparable across groups, both clinical groups committed more errors than NCs. In contrast to the NC boys, boys with ADHD were unaffected by frequency and magnitude of reward. The NC group and, to some extent, the ASD group showed improved performance, when rewards were delivered infrequently versus frequently. Children with ADHD as well as children with ASD displayed difficulties in stimulus-response coupling that were independent of motivational modulations. Possibly, these deficits are related to abnormal reinforcement expectancy. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserve

Motivational effects on motor timing in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

Objective: This study was designed to clarify whether poor performance of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) on motor timing tasks reflects a true deficit in the temporal organization of motor output or is due to a lack of intrinsic motivation. Method: Eighteen children with ADHD (age 8-12) were compared with 18 age- and gender-matched normal controls with respect to timing precision, timing variability, and the frequency of extreme under- and overestimations during a 1-second interval production task. Monetary reward, response cost, and no reward were implemented to manipulate motivation. Results: Children with ADHD produced significantly more inaccurate and more variable time intervals and exhibited a larger number of extreme over- and underestimations than control children. Although all children performed significantly better when monetary incentives were applied, group differences were not eliminated. Conclusions: In this study, no evidence was found for a motivational deficit as an explanation for impaired performance on a time production task in ADHD. Rather, results provide clear support for a generic motor timing deficit, probably due to a dysfunctional frontostriatocerebellar network involved in temporal aspects of motor preparation. ©2005 by the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry