Skip to main content
. 2022 Aug 31;20(3):514–525. doi: 10.9758/cpn.2022.20.3.514

Table 2.

The difference in LDAEP between low and high impulsivity group

Variable Low impulsivity group (n = 17) High impulsivity group (n = 16) pvalue
Age 9.53 ± 1.54 8.69 ± 1.85 0.179
LDAEP_baseline 0.43 ± 0.76 1.07 ± 1.14 0.043a
Total IQ 111 ± 15 107 ± 12 0.567
ADHD rating scale
Total ARS 18.8 ± 7.2 27.4 ± 11.6 0.080
Inattention ARS 9.7 ± 4.2 14.5 ± 6.1 0.096
Hyperactivity-Impulsivity ARS 8.7 ± 4.2 14.3 ± 7.1 0.072
Continuous performance test (T score)
Visual omission error 55.1 ± 18.4 64.8 ± 16.8 0.008
Visual commission error 53.6 ± 5.8 81.13 ± 13.2 < 0.001
Visual reaction time 60.7 ± 10.5 57.5 ± 11.2 0.402
Visual reaction time SD 54.2 ± 12.5 65.8 ± 16.3 0.031
Auditory omission error 66.76 ± 16.7 58.33 ± 19.1 0.114
Auditory commission error 57.1 ± 9.9 63.5 ± 20.1 0.710
Auditory reaction time 71.0 ± 7.1 61.6 ± 11.0 0.006
Auditory reaction time SD 54.82 ± 11.1 52.4 ± 10.4 0.682

Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation.

LDAEP, loudness dependence of the auditory evoked potential; ADHD, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder; SD, standard deviation; ARS, ADHD rating scale; IQ, intellectual quotient.

The high-impulsivity group had a T score of ≥65 and the low-impulsivity group had a T score of < 65. The two groups of subjects showed signicantly dierent LDAEP levels (F = 4.539, p= 0.043) after controlling age and IQ as covariates. Mann Whitney Utest was conducted to compare two groups.

aANCOVA after adjusting for age and total IQ.