Re-Examining the Stop-Signal Task to Test Competing Theories of AD/HD

The current study tested two competing models of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (AD/HD), the inhibition and state regulation theories, by conducting fine-grained analyses of the Stop-Signal Task and another putative measure of behavioral inhibition, the Gordon Continuous Performance Test (G-CPT), in a large sample of children and adolescents. The inhibition theory posits that performance on these tasks reflects increased difficulties for AD/HD participants to inhibit prepotent responses. The model predicts that putative stop-signal reaction time (SSRT) group differences on the Stop-Signal Task will be primarily related to AD/HD participants requiring more warning than control participants to inhibit to the stop-signal and emphasizes the relative importance of commission errors, particularly "impulsive" type commissions, over other error types on the G-CPT. The state regulation theory, on the other hand, proposes response variability due to difficulties maintaining an optimal state of arousal as the primary deficit in AD/HD. This model predicts that SSRT differences will be more attributable to slower and/or more variable reaction time (RT) in the AD/HD group, as opposed to reflecting inhibitory deficits. State regulation assumptions also emphasize the relative importance of omission errors and "slow processing" type commissions over other error types on the G-CPT. Overall, results of Stop-Signal Task analyses were more supportive of state regulation predictions and showed that greater response variability (i.e., SDRT) in the AD/HD group was not reducible to slow mean reaction time (MRT) and that response variability made a larger contribution to increased SSRT in the AD/HD group than inhibitory processes. Examined further, ex-Gaussian analyses of Stop-Signal Task go-trial RT distributions revealed that increased variability in the AD/HD group was not due solely to a few excessively long RTs in the tail of the AD/HD distribution (i.e., tau), but rather indicated the importance of response variability throughout AD/HD group performance on the Stop-Signal Task, as well as the notable sensitivity of ex-Gaussian analyses to variability in data screening procedures. Results of G-CPT analyses indicated some support for the inhibition model, although error type analyses failed to further differentiate the theories. Finally, inclusion of primary variables of interest in exploratory factor analysis with other neurocognitive predictors of AD/HD indicated response variability as a separable construct and further supported its role in Stop-Signal Task performance. Response variability did not, however, make a unique contribution to the prediction of AD/HD symptoms beyond measures of motor processing speed in multiple deficit regression analyses. Results have implications for the interpretation of the processes reflected in widely-used variables in the AD/HD literature, as well as for the theoretical understanding of AD/HD.

The Impact of Sexual Boundary Violations in Supervision and Therapy: A Qualitative Study of a Trainee's First-Hand Account

This study involves a qualitative analysis of a doctoral-level psychology trainee's first-hand account of sexual attraction and boundary violations that occurred in her clinical supervision and psychotherapy. Concepts of power, gender, social performance theory, and relational framing are applied to two case examples, illustrating the differing demands on a trainee when her relationships were sexualized in two distinct professional contexts. Ramifications of supervisory exploitation and the impact of such an experience on a trainee's professional development are discussed. Recommendations are provided for improving psychology training programs' prevention and response efforts.

Dignity and the Eighth Amendment: A New Approach to Challenging Solitary Confinement

The use of solitary confinement in U.S. prisons and jails has come under increasing scrutiny. Over the past few months, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy all but invited constitutional challenges to the use of solitary confinement, while President Obama asked, “Do we really think it makes sense to lock so many people alone in tiny cells for 23 hours a day for months, sometime for years at a time?” Even some of the most notorious prisons and jails, including California’s Pelican Bay State Prison and New York’s Rikers Island, are reforming their use of solitary confinement because of successful litigation and public outcry. Rovner suggests that in light of these developments and “the Supreme Court’s increasing reliance on human dignity as a substantive value underlying and animating constitutional rights,” there is a strong case to make that long-term solitary confinement violates the constitutional right to freedom from cruel and unusual punishment.