Measuring Children's Attention Span: A Microcomputer Assessment Technique

Author(s): Virginia Murphy-Berman, Jon Rosell and Gregg Wright

Source: The Journal of Educational Research , Sep. - Oct., 1986, Vol. 80, No. 1 (Sep. -
Oct., 1986), pp. 23-28
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/27540237

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
The Journal of Educational Research

This content downloaded from

93.140.20.113 on Thu, 11 Nov 2021 18:23:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Measuring Children's Attention Span:
A Microcomputer Assessment Technique
VIRGINIA MURPHY-BERMAN GREGG WRIGHT
JON ROSELL Nebraska Department of Health
University of Nebraska-Lincoln

relate to children's behavior in a variety of other nontest

ABSTRACT The purpose of this research was to ob
tain development norms on a microcomputer-based test of at
tention. The test assessed subjects' ability to attend to a pic
torial signal over a specified period of time. The average inter
stimulus interval (ISI) and the false alarm rate (responding
positively to a nontarget signal) were used as outcome
measures in the test. The test was given to 115 boys and 117
girls ranging in grade levels K to 9. To assess performance
stability over time, the test was administered to each student
twice. Portions of the test were given with and without the
presence of pictorial distractors. The relationship of the atten
tion scores to various social and behavioral indices was also
assessed.
The research indicated that boys had a significantly higher
overall false alarm rate than girls. Attentional ability, as de
fined by the interstimulus interval scores, increased only up
through grade 5. Students improved in overall performance
from the first to the second test session. Distractors had no
clear impact on either of the outcome measures. Both the false
alarm rate and the ISI scores were related to behavioral ratings
of activity during the test sessions. Scores on an abbreviated
Conners checklist measure also correlated significantly with
both outcome measures. Implications of the findings are
discussed.
situations.
An approach to assessing attention that is fairly * 'ob
jective' ' and less prone to subjective interpretation than
traditional rating scale techniques has been provided by
tasks known as vigilance tasks. The vigilance paradigm
involves the prolonged monitoring of a signal and a re
quired response. A well-known vigilance task is the
Continuous Performance Test (Rosvold, Mirsky,
Sarason, Bransome, & Beck, 1956). In this task, the
child is required to respond to a target signal (usually
the letter X or the letter X which follows the letter A)
that is presented along with other nontarget signals in a
random sequence. Although this test has been used
widely for research purposes (e.g., Campbell, Douglas
& Morgenstern, 1971; Conners & Rothschild, 1968;
Rutschman, Cornblatt, & Erlenmeyer-Kimling, 1977;
Sykes, Douglas, Weiss, & Minde, 1971), it has not
proved to be a practical tool for providing information
concerning developmental differences in children's at
tentional skills. This is because the test appears to be
more appropriate for use with children of some ages or
types than others. For instance, the letter stimuli used in
the task appear to be too difficult for very young
children or for children who have certain types of learn
ing disabilities (e.g., Anderson, 1974). Additionally, the
particular rate used for signal presentation may not be

A large culties
number of with
associated children
attentionexperience
problems. school diffi equally challenging for the younger and older student.
Because the rate is constant, a speed that is slow enough
Estimates of the prevalence of attention-related dis
orders range from 1 to 20% of all school children to be appropriate for the younger child may create a
task that is excessively boring and tedious for the older
(Lambert, Sandoval & Sassone, 1978; Yanow, 1973).
child.
Attention problems have been linked to low achieve
ment and low social adjustment in a variety of school
In order to alleviate this type of rate problem
situations (Soli & Devine, 1976). Although many chil Rapoport (1978) and Buchbaum and Murphy (1978)
dren exhibit these attention-related difficulties, a precise developed a version of a Continuous Performance Task
that had a dynamic self-adjusting signal speed feature.
understanding of the extent of this problem is difficult
to gauge because of the unreliability of methods that are
In this task, the signal-presentation rate was linked
often used to assess attention. Most commonly used directly with each subject's performance so that the
procedures include behavioral checklists or rating scales
that are open to subjective interpretation and often have
limited normative data. Little is known concerning how
Address correspondence to Virginia Murphy-Berman,
attention skills may vary across different grade levels Department of Special Education and Communication
and/or may differ in development for boys and girls. Disorders, 301 Barkley Memorial Center, University of
Also, little is known concerning how attention skills Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68583-0738.

23

This content downloaded from

93.140.20.113 on Thu, 11 Nov 2021 18:23:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

signal sped up with correct responses and slowed down
with errors.
This article describes children's performance on an
"objective" attention test adapted from the Rapoport
(1978) and Buchbaum and Murphy tests (1978). Our
test, which was developed for use with a microcom
puter, was designed to be appropriate for use with
children of a wide age span. It is referred to here as the
Microcomputer Test of Attention (MTA). To allow its
use with younger children, simple pictorial targets in
stead of letters were employed as signals. A dynamic
self-adjusting signal rate instead of a fixed-rate feature
was also used so the test difficulty level would be appro
priate for children of different ages and skill levels.
With the MTA, one can analyze both the child's abil
ity to maintain attention over time, and his or her ability
to focus on relevant information while excluding irrel
evant or distracting information. These two compo
nents of attention have been deemed important (e.g.,
Krupski, 1981) and may be tapping different underlying
processes. The types of attention errors the child makes
(e.g., impulsive responding versus nonresponding) can
also be tracked with the MTA.
This article examines how children's performance on
such a multidimensional type of attention task may vary
with age and sex. The relationship of attention on this
type of structured measure to various social and
behavioral indices was also assessed. Five specific
research questions were addressed:
1. Is there a developmental age trend evident in
children's performance on this type of structured
attention task?
2. Do boys perform differently on this type of task
than girls?
3. Does performance on this type of task remain
stable over test administrations?
4. How do distractors affect children's ability to
maintain attention?
5. Do the above factors interact with one another?
For instance, if there is a sex difference is it consis
tent across grade levels?
Method
Subjects
Six public schools in the Lincoln, Nebraska, area
agreed to serve as testing locations. Enrollment lists
from each test site were obtained. First, children identi
fied as special education students or those who had any
visual or physical handicap that would impair their
ability to complete the task were eliminated. Then from
the remaining names children were randomly selected
for project participation. All children fell within
average intelligence ranges. Parents or guardians of
This content downloaded from
93.140.20.113 on Thu, 11 Nov 2021 18:23:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
24 Journal of Educational Research
Table 1.?Breakdown of Subjects
Grade n Boys Girls
K 26 15 11
1 27 12 15
2 37 19 18
3 35 17 18
4 28 13 15
5 30 17 13
7 26 12 17
9 20 10 10
each selected child were sent study permission form
and only children who turned these forms in were
cluded in the final test sample. The final number of s
jects utilized is displayed in Table 1.
The Vigilance Attention Test
The vigilance test was presented to subjects via
Apple microcomputer. Subjects' responses to the t
stimuli were automatically scored and stored on App
diskettes. The test consisted of 40 blocks of stimuli w
21 stimuli per block presented on a TV monitor attach
to the computer. The stimuli were six easily identif
shapes. One of these shapes in the form of a plane w
defined as the target signal. This target signal w
presented to subjects in a random sequence along wit
five other nontarget signals. Subjects were instructed
press the return key of the computer as quickly as th
could (or the escape key if they were left handed) eve
time the target signal appeared within a box on the
monitor. When subjects got a correct hit (hit the targ
signal within a specified time frame), the signal rate
interstimulus interval automatically sped up by 10%
hit was also followed by an auditory beep that served
a response reinforcer. A miss or not hitting the target in
the allotted time frame slowed the signal rate by 20%
did a false alarm or hitting a nontarget signal. Late h
or hitting the signal just after the allocated time fra
were recorded but had no effect on the signal rate. Th
signal rate or interstimulus interval time was autom
ically recorded at the end of each eighth and stored o
the diskettes. This rate during the different test interva
was used as an outcome measure for the test. Fal
alarms were also recorded throughout the test and use
as an outcome measure.
During the distraction intervals target signals were
presented outside the designated box area while a non
target signal was presented within the box. Because su
jects were instructed to pay attention only to pictur
within the box, these outside-the-box signals served
visual distractors. Half of the time these distracto
were presented on the left side of the screen and half
the time on the right side of the screen.
September/October 1986 [Vol. 80(No. 1)] 25
Social and Behavioral Items
Data on several social and behavioral items were col
lected prior to, during, and following the assessment
procedures. Two types of anxiety measures were em
ployed. One scale, the Test Anxiety Scale for Children
(TASC) from Sarason, Davidson, Lightfall, Waite, &
Ruehbush (1960), assessed a general tendency to be ap
prehensive in evaluative situations and consisted of 30
items to which children respond with a simple yes or no
answer. Children were also asked to rate on a scale from
1 to 4 how nervous they felt during the actual attention
test procedure. In addition, general and specific behav
ioral rating measures were also included as part of the
assessment procedure. Prior to the test session, class
room teachers of participating children filled out the
Conner s Abbreviated Teacher Rating Scale (Conners,
1973). This scale consists of 10 items from the 39-item
Conners Teachers Rating Scale (Conners, 1969). The 10
items in the abbreviated form consist of those questions
that have been found to be most discriminating in
identifying children who exhibit attention difficulties or
hyperactive type symptomatology. During the test ses
sion, the tester also rated the child's behavior on a vari
ety of dimensions. Specifically, the tester noted whether
during the testing the child attempted to leave his or her
seat, glanced away from the TV screen more than three
or four times, showed behavioral signs of restlessness
such as shifting in his or her seat or fidgeting exces
sively, showed behavioral signs of anxiety such as trem
bling or shaking, and made any remarks during the
testing. Finally, children were asked how often they
played video games on a four-point scale ranging from
never to every day.
The test anxiety, self-report of nervousness, and
video experience items were presented one at a time at
the end of the test session on the TV monitor. The tester
read each question aloud to the child and pressed an ap
propriate key on the computer to indicate the child's
response, which was then automatically stored on the
diskette.
Procedure
Testers. Ten female testers were hired to administer
the test to the children. Each tester was trained to ad
minister the test in a consistent manner during three
one-hour training sessions.
Equipment. Six Apple microcomputers with TV
monitors and simple disk drives were used in the test
procedure. The computers were placed on desks that
were of an appropriate height for the students.
Throughout the study, each school used an assigned
testing room that was located in an area of the school
where distractors were kept to a minimum.
Testing process. Children were tested individually
This content downloaded from
93.140.20.113 on Thu, 11 Nov 2021 18:23:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
during two different scheduled test periods. The total
testing time took about 20-30 minutes per child at each
session.
During each session the tester introduced herself and
told the child that he or she was going to take a new test
for which there were no right or wrong answers. The
child was to listen to the tester carefully and try hard.
Prior to initiating the main vigilance test, students
were given a practice session in which signals were
presented with and without distractors. The actual test
was begun only after the testers were assured that the
child understood the test procedure.
Instructions for the vigilance test were presented on
the monitor in simple language and read aloud to the
children. After the vigilance component of the assess
ment, the posttest interview items were presented one at
a time on the monitor. The tester read aloud each
question-and-answer option and pressed an appropriate
key on the computer to store the students' responses.
After the child was escorted back to his or her room, the
tester answered the items on behavioral activity during
testing. Before the child was picked up for the testing
procedure, the tester filled in information about the
child's age, grade level, sex, and Conners score. This
procedure was followed during the second test session.
Results
Vigilance Attention Test
A mixed-model repeated-measures analysis of vari
ance was employed to analyze the data. Specifically, a
2x2x7 (Test Administration x Subject Sex x
Grade Level) ANO VA was used. The first factor was a
repeated factor, and the last two were grouping vari
ables. Separate analyses were run to contrast perform
ance during the distracted versus the undistracted inter
vals using distractors as a repeated measure. The aver
age interstimulus interval and false alarm rate were used
as outcome measures.
Interstimulus interval rate (ISI). The analyses re
vealed a significant main effect of grade level, F(l, 216)
= 31.5, p < .001. The mean ISI scores (expressed in
millisecond units) for grades K through 5,7, and 9 were,
respectively, 876.29, 722.57, 612.99, 573.55, 570.03,
493.74, 542.78, and 475.36. A significant main effect
was also found for test administration period, F(l, 216)
= 10.79, p < .001, on students' average ISI rate. The
means for test periods 1 and 2 were 620.19 and 595.91,
respectively. There was also a nonsignificant trend
toward a sex difference on the ISI measure, F(2, 216) =
3.53, p < .061, M = 622.95 for boys and 593.41 for
girls. A significant two-way interaction was found be
tween grade level and test administration session, F(7,
216) = 2.69, p < .011. This interaction is depicted in
Table 2. The younger children tended to improve in
 26 Journal of Educational Research

Table 2.?Average ISI Rate over Grade Levels and Test Quarters Table 3.?Average False Alarms Total Scores

Grade Test 1 Test 2 Grade Test 1 Test 2

K 891.71 860.86 K 25.54 34.38

1 744.13 700.99 1 30.59 30.22
2 630.74 595.24 2 24.92 28.70
3 600.65 545.89 3 25.71 21.09
4 594.91 545.89 4 20.50 19.18
5 505.53 481.93 5 26.83 28.47
7 522.85 562.59 7 27.28 47.86
9 462.02 488.71 9 24.85 34.90

their performance during the second test tivity rating during testing. The Conne
administration
period, whereas the older children (seventh and ninth
self-report of nervousness rating yielde
graders) showed the reverse pattern. Thescore
presence correlations
of the but failed to achie
distractors did not have any clearly demonstrable
regressionim equation.
pact on the students' ISI scores.
False alarms. Analyses revealed a significant
Discussion main ef
fect of sex, F(l, 216) = 15.10,/? < .000, mean for boys
= 34.66 and for girls = 21.34, and for test administra
Children with attention problems often experience
tion period, F(l, 216) = 15.12,p< .000,considerable
mean for test
academic difficulties despite adequate in
period 1 = 25.77 and for test period 2 = 30.12. A sig
telligence (Ross & Ross, 1982). This has been noted by
nificant two-way interaction was also found
reports fromfor grade
teachers and parents, as well as research
level and test administration period, F(7, 216) = 2.39,
ers. If problems in attention can be identified early and
p < .022. This interaction is depicted objectively,
in Table 3. Stucould be initiated that might
interventions
dents, particularly those in the higher grades,
help preventhad more scholastic spirals.
such downward
false alarms the second time the test was given. There
The purpose of this study was to collect developmen
was no general grade level main effect ononfalse
tal data alarm
children's performance on a structured at
rate. The presence of the distractors also had no clear
tention task. The relationship of children's performance
impact on students' level of false alarmonresponding.
this task to other social and behavioral measures out
side the test situation was also examined. Such informa
Multiple Regression Analysis tion is important if structured attention tasks such as the
one described here are to have use as diagnostic tools in
the classroom.
A stepwise multiple-regression procedure was used to
assess how the social and behavioral variables related
Developmental trends.toChildrens' overall perform
the students' scores on the MTA. The variables entered
ance on the attention task showed continuous improve
as potential predictors were the Sarason mentTest
up through
Anxietygrade 5. Interestingly, this improve
Scale score, self-report of nervousnessment in performance
score, the Con with age did not continue at the
ners score, the behavioral rating during higher
test grade levels. self
score, This shift in the developmental
report of video game experience, grade trendlevel, couldandbe due
sex. to a variety of methodological
Because kindergarten students did not and/or general motivational
complete the factors.
test anxiety scale, they are not included First,
in theany olderofstudents
the may have been less respon
regression analyses. Also, the Conners sive than was
scale the younger
only students to this particular type of
obtained on about half of the sample socomputer
the final game-like
n for assessment technique. When stu
dents were questioned about their reactions to the test,
the regression analysis was reduced to 143.
Table 4 presents the regression equationsthe older
forstudents
the four did indicate that they liked the test
criterion variables of ISI and false alarmless
rate for test
and thought ad did less well on it than the
that they
younger students.
ministration periods 1 and 2. Table 5 presents the mean Thus, what may have seemed to be a
scores on each of the measured predictors fun game andfor the
the very rawyoung child may have appeared
more like tedious
score correlations of each potential predictor withwork eachfor the older student, and this
criterion measure. perception may have diminished the older students' mo
tivation to
The significant predictors of the ISI score do wellthe
were on the task. Second, the downward
behavioral rating during testing measure shift and
in attentional
the stu performance shown by the older
studentsof
dents' grade level. The significant predictors may thehavefalse
reflected some real attentional
alarm outcome measure were sex and the declinebehavioral
for these students. ac Students at the seventh- and

This content downloaded from

93.140.20.113 on Thu, 11 Nov 2021 18:23:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
September/October 1986 [Vol. 80(No. 1)1 27
ninth-grade level are just entering adolescence and are in
a period of physiological and social transition. At such
points of transition and social/psychological change, at
tentional ability may be temporarily diminished.
Sex differences. Boys were found to have higher
overall false alarm rates than girls on the attention task.
This false alarm rate is indicative of a more impulsive
response style. Boys seemed less able than girls to wait
for the correct signal to occur and rather repeatedly hit
the response key when nonsignals were present. The
boys not only reacted more impulsively on the struc
tured task but also talked and moved around in their
seats more during the assessment procedure. These sex
differences were remarkably consistent across grade
levels. Sex differences have been noted in clinical popu
lations of children with severe behavioral impairments.
For instance, five times as many males as females are
likely to be labeled hyperactive or to fit the criteria for
having a significant attention deficit (Ross & Ross,
1982). This study suggests that gender differences in at
tention are not confined just to clinical populations but
are apparent in groups of average functioning children
as well. Although data here do not demonstrate that
girls are clearly superior in attentional ability, the find
ings do suggest that boys and girls may have different
attentional styles or proneness to different types of at
tention errors.
Impact of distractors. Another purpose of the study
was to assess how distractors would affect children's
ability to maintain attention. Surprisingly, we found
that visual distractors had little effect on children's per
formance on our task. Even younger children seemed to
adjust very quickly to the presence of the distractors and
maintained very consistent performance in the distrac
tion and nondistraction periods. Children, then, even at
a very young age, seem quite able to focus their atten
tion on relevant stimuli and selectively respond to ap
propriate targets while screening out inappropriate
targets.
Performance stability over time. Students' scores
showed some overall shifts from the first to the second
Table 4.?Regression Equation
Criterion Significant Standardized
variable predictors3
Test 1 ISI Grade level
Behaviorb
Test 2 ISI Grade level
Behavior
False alarms Sex
Test 1 Behavior
False alarms Sex
Test 2 Behavior
Significant at p < .05. bBehavioral activity during testing.
This content downloaded from
93.140.20.113 on Thu, 11 Nov 2021 18:23:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
assessment period, although general patterns of scores
and predictors remained fairly stable across time. Inter
estingly, this general shift in attention scores was differ
ent for the younger (K-5) and older (seventh and ninth
grade) students. The younger students improved in per
formance over the assessment periods, whereas the chil
dren in the seventh and ninth grades performed better
the first time they took the test. Perhaps the younger
students needed more time to adjust to this type of
assessment procedure than the older students who may
have found the task more boring the second time around.
This finding points to the importance of assessing
students' perceptions of and reactions to test procedures
as well as simply recording outcome measures if com
prehensive analyses of children's capabilities are to be
obtained. This finding also points to the potential danger
of using only limited, one-shot time samples to measure
complex behaviors or capabilities such as attention.
Social and behavioral predictors. Finally, the regres
sion and correlational data yielded some further infor
mation. First, children's scores on the attention test
were not related to general test anxiety or to specific
self-report of nervousness. Attention then, as assessed
by this type of task, is not interfered with by perform
ance apprehension. Second, children's previous video
game experience did not relate to their attention scores,
suggesting that the computerized test was not simply
measuring computer game skill.
Attention scores were related to behavioral observa
tions taken outside and during the assessment situation,
the latter being the most powerful predictor of the out
come measures; that is, children who had higher scores
on the Conner s scale, indicating more restless active
behavior in the classroom, also showed less ability to
maintain attention on the computerized test. Such chil
dren also behaved more restlessly in the assessment
situation. This suggests that using this type of computer
game format to assess attention skills may be useful in
predicting the children's behavior in other situations re
quiring attentional ability.
In summary, data was collected on children's per
beta R2 p level
-.59 .43 53.65 < .000
.28
-.35 .29 30.18 < .000
.30
-.23 .11 8.76 < .003
.21
-.18 .07 5.36 < .005
.19
28 Journal of Educational Research

Table 5.?Mean Scores and Correlations for Predictors

Raw correlation with criterion

Potential Time 1 ISI Time 2 ISI Time 1 FAb Time 2 FA
predictors3 M r r r r
Test anxiety 12.14 .078 -.044 -.042 -.137*
(score range 0-30) (ns) (ns) (ns)
Self-report of 1.76 -.194* -.159* .023 .135*
nervousness (ns)
(1 = not at all;
4 = very nervous)
Conners scorec 4.12 .117* .128* .180** .154**
(range 0-30)
Summed behaviord .77 .279*** .455*** .247*** 199***
(score range 0-5)
Self-report of 2.52 .054 .051 .179** .075
video experience (ns) (ns) (ns)
(1 = never; 4 =
every day)
Sex .006 .012 -.265*** -.197***
(ns) (ns)
Grade level -.596*** -.32 .025 .103
(ns) (ns)

aIn all cases, the lower number a lower score on the scale. bFaise alarm. cCutoff range for
dBehavioral rating during testing.
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .00.

formance on a structured computerized styles attention test.

in hyperactive children and the effect of Methylphenidate.
Journal ofattention
The data support the notion that although Child Psychologyis andaPsychiatry, 12, 55-67.
Conners, C. K. (1969). A teacher rating scale for use with drug studies
developmental dimension in children, attentional
with children. American per
Journal of Psychiatry, 126, 885-888.
formance may not increase in a clear
Conners,linear fashion
C. K. (1973). Rating scales for use in drug studies with
children. Psychopharmacology Bulletin, 10, 24-84.
through the primary and secondary grades. Differences
Conners, C. K., & Rothschild, G. H. (1968). Drugs and learning in
were noted in performance patterns children.
of boys and girls
In J. Hellmuth (Ed.), Learning disorders (Vol. 3). Seattle:
that parallel previous clinical and observational
Special Child Publication.find
ings. Using this type of methodologyKrupski,
to A. (1981). An interactionist
measure chil approach to the study of
attention problems in children with learning handicaps. Exceptional
dren's attention seems to have good potential for 2,use
Education Quarterly, 2-11. in
the classroom either as an adjunct to or a
Lambert, N. replacement
M., Sandoval, J., & Sassone, D. (1978). Prevalence of
hyperactivity in elementary school children as a function of social
for more subjective rating scale approaches. Because
system definers. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 48,
adequate attention is a basic prerequisite
446-463. for academic
achievement, development of objectiveRapoport, J. L. and
(1978). simple
Dextroamphetamine: Cognitive and
methods to assess attentional ability behavioral effects in normal
in children prepubertal boys. Science, 99, 1-18.
seems
Ross, D. M., & Ross, S. A. (1982). Hyperactivity: Current issues,
essential. Future research might further explore the
research and theory. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
development of attentional skills inRosvold,
a wider H. E., Mirsky,
age A.rangeF., Sarason, I., Bransome, E. D., &
and type of student, and specifically focus on evalua performance test of brain
Beck, L. H. (1956). A continuous
damage. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 20, 343-350.
tions of how early identification ofRutschman,
attention problems
J., Cornblatt, B., & Erlengmeyer-Kimling, L. (1977).
in the classroom may be used to guide subsequent
Sustained attention in children edu
at risk for schizophrenia. Archives
of General Psychiatry, 3, 20-26.
cational planning and decision-making efforts.
Sarason, S. B., Davidson, K. S., Lightfall, F. F., Waite, R. R., &
Ruehbush, B. K. (1960). Anxiety in elementary school children.
New York: John Wiley & Sons.
REFERENCES Soli, S. D., & Devine, V. T. (1976). Behavioral characteristics of
achievements: A look at high and low achievers. Journal of Educa
Anderson, V. E. (1974). Response of P.K.U. children on a tional Psychology, 68, 335-341.
continuous performance test. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, Sykes, D. H., Douglas, V. I., Weiss, G., & Minde, K. K. (1971).
358(69), 179-183. Attention in hyperactive children and the effect of Methyl
Buchbaum, M. S., Murphy, D. L., Coursey, R. D., Lake, C. R., &phenidate. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 12,
Zeigler, M. G. (1978). Platelet Monoamine Oxidase, Plasma 129-139.
Dopamine-Beta-Hydroxylase and attention in a "biochemical highYanow, M. A. (1973). A report on the use of behavior modification
risk" sample. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 14, 215-224. drugs on elementary school children. In M. Yanow (Ed.), Observa
Campbell, S. B., Douglas, V. I., & Morgenstern, G. (1971). Cognitive tion from the treadmill. New York: Viking Press.

This content downloaded from

93.140.20.113 on Thu, 11 Nov 2021 18:23:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms