Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorLeffingwell, Thad
dc.contributor.authorFedele, David A.
dc.date.accessioned2014-04-15T22:23:40Z
dc.date.available2014-04-15T22:23:40Z
dc.date.issued2008-07-01
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11244/9417
dc.description.abstractAttention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) affects approximately 4 to 5% of adults. Adults diagnosed with ADHD experience more academic, social, and occupational difficulties than their same age counterparts To address the dearth of scientific knowledge concerning adult ADHD, Barkley and Murphy proposed nine items that had diagnostic utility for diagnosing adult ADHD. These nine items have not been tested in another sample. The current study was aimed to cross-validate the proposed adult ADHD items in a younger adult sample. Participants were recruited for an ADHD group, a clinical control group, and a typical control group. Participants were recruited from three large universities (i.e., one in the Southeast, one in the Southwest, and one in the Mountain West). Participants completed a demographic form, a DSM-IV symptom checklist and Barkley and Murphy's proposed criteria. Regression analyses were conducted to determine whether the DSM-IV criteria and/or the proposed adult criteria accounted for unique variance in impairment. Measures of impairment were a self-reported impairment checklist, high school and college GPA. When impairment was the DV, the proposed adult criteria (? = .28, p <.001), DSM-IV inattention (? = .37, p < .001), and DSM-IV hyperactivity (? = .20, p < .001) all accounted for unique variance. When high school GPA was the DV, the proposed adult criteria (? = -.08, p = .09) did not account for unique variance but DSM-IV inattention (? = -.24, p < .001) and hyperactivity (? = .11, p < .02) did. When college GPA was the DV, the proposed adult criteria (? = -.25, p < .001), DSM-IV inattention (? = -.11, p = .032) and hyperactivity (? = .15, p = .002) all accounted for unique variance. Barkley and Murphy (2006) demonstrated that their proposed criterion set, focusing on executive functioning, has diagnostic utility. However, they used a sample with a mean age of 32 to 37 years of age while the current sample had a range of 18 to 57 and a mean age of 20. Perhaps due to the younger sample, both the proposed adult and DSM-IV criteria have diagnostic utility. Therefore, the use of both the DSM-IV criteria and proposed adult criteria is recommended for college students.
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.languageen_US
dc.publisherOklahoma State University
dc.rightsCopyright is held by the author who has granted the Oklahoma State University Library the non-exclusive right to share this material in its institutional repository. Contact Digital Library Services at lib-dls@okstate.edu or 405-744-9161 for the permission policy on the use, reproduction or distribution of this material.
dc.titleAssessing the Diagnostic Utility Of Proposed Adult Adhd Symptoms In A Young Adult Sample
dc.typetext
dc.contributor.committeeMemberKennison, Shelia
dc.contributor.committeeMemberThomas, David G.
osu.filenameFedele_okstate_0664M_2798.pdf
osu.collegeArts and Sciences
osu.accesstypeOpen Access
dc.description.departmentDepartment of Psychology
dc.type.genreThesis


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record