Table 2.

Mind-wandering sustained attention to response task (SART) performance. Model estimated means, 95% confidence intervals, and effect sizes for reaction time variability across groups and conditions

Block type	Control, n = 55 M [95% CI]	ADHD placebo, n = 54 M [95% CI]	ADHD MPH, n = 55 M [95% CI]	Cohen’s d effect size, Control vs. ADHD placebo	Within-subject effect size, ADHD placebo vs. ADHD MPH
Non-self-referential	71.06 [69.01, 73.11]	88.15 [86.10, 90.19]b	81.74 [79.70, 83.78]c	3.14***	0.72*
Self-referential	69.53 [67.48, 71.58]	96.29 [94.24, 98.34]a,b	87.07 [85.02, 89.11]c	2.19***	1.07**
Within-subject effect sizes of block type
Non-self-referential vs. self-referential	0.15	1.29*	1.01

MPH = methylphenidate. Within-subjects effect sizes were calculated accounting for the correlation between scores (Morris & DeShon, 2002), $d=\frac{\left|m_1-m_2\right|}{\sqrt{S_1^2+S_2^2-\left(2r{s}_1{s}_2\right)}}$. At p < .05

^aSignificant effect of block type (vs. non-self-referential)

^bSignificant effect of ADHD status

^cSignificant effect of MPH.

^*p < .05

^**p < .01

^***p < .001