Children and adults with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder cannot move to the beat

Transcription

1 1 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Childre ad adults with Attetio-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder caot move to the beat Frédéric Puyjariet 1, Valeti Bégel 1,2, Régis Lopez 3,4, Delphie Dellacherie 5,6, & Simoe Dalla Bella 1,7,8,9* 1 EuroMov Laboratory Uiversity of Motpellier 700 Av. du Pic Sait Loup Motpellier, Frace 2 NaturalPad, SAS 700 Av. du Pic Sait Loup Motpellier, Frace 3 Natioal referece ceter for arcolepsy ad idiopathic hypersomia, specialized i adult ADHD, Gui-de-Chauliac Uiversity Hospital 80 Av. Augusti Fliche Motpellier, Frace 4 Iserm Uit U1061, La Colombière Uiversity Hospital 39 Av. Charles Flahault Motpellier, Frace 5 Departmet of Psychology, PSITEC-EA 4072 Laboratory, Uiversity of Lille Domaie Uiversitaire «Pot de bois» Villeeuve d Ascq, Frace 6 Uiversity Hospital of Lille, Departmet of Pediatric Neurology 2 Av. Oscar Lambret Lille, Frace 7 Iteratioal Laboratory for Brai, Music ad Soud Research (BRAMS) 1430 Boulevard du Mot-Royal Motreal, QC H2V 2J2, Caada 8 Istitut Uiversitaire de Frace 1 Rue Descartes Paris, Frace 9 Departmet of Cogitive Psychology, WSFiZ i Warsaw Ul. Pawia , Warsaw, Polad *Correspodig Author: Simoe Dalla Bella (PhD), simoe.dalla-bella@umotpellier.fr +33 (0)

2 2 Timig ad beat perceptio Effects of age i childre with ADHD ad cotrols There were o statistically-sigificat differeces betwee ADHD childre ad the cotrol group i terms of age [t (16.1) = 1.05, P = 0.31, d = 0.36]. Additioally, we tested potetial correlatios betwee age ad cogitive measures (short-term memory, flexibility, ad ihibitio) as well as perceptual ad sesorimotor rhythmic skills. Correlatios did ot reach sigificace for cogitive measures [average r = 0.06, P = 0.75], ad for beat perceptio tasks [average r = , P = 0.71]. However, performace i paced tappig slightly improved with age [r = 0.29, P < 0.05]. Differeces betwee ADHD ad ADHD-DCD childre performace performace i timig ad beat perceptio tasks for childre with ADHD oly ad with ADHD-DCD are reported i Table S1. Discrepacies i the samples size for each task are due to the fact that i some cases the thresholds could ot be reliably computed. The thresholds i the Duratio discrimiatio ad Aisochroy detectio tasks were obtaied by averagig the values obtaied i the three blocks, expressed i percetage of IOI (Weber ratio). Blocks with more tha 30 % of false alarms (FAs, whe a differece for a catch trial is reported) were removed. Moreover, blocks leadig to aberrat threshold estimatios due to persistet local miima i the maximum-likelihood procedure, or due to a lack of covergece of the estimatio fuctio at the ed of a block, were rejected. I the latter case, the covergece of the estimated threshold was assessed by calculatig the slope of local threshold values across the last eight trials of a block. Lack of covergece was idicated by a slope exceedig 10 % relative to the mea threshold of the precedig trials (for details, see Dalla Bella et al., 2017). I additio, oe participat did ot carry out the BAT task, ad data could ot be correctly recorded for 4 participats i this task due to techical issues. As ca be see i Table S1, childre with ADHD did ot differ sigificatly from childre with ADHD-DCD o all the perceptual tasks. Their thresholds did ot differ sigificatly i the Duratio discrimiatio task [t (28.7) = 1.16, P = 0.26, d = 0.40]. To compare the performace of the two sub-groups i the Aisochroy detectio tasks, thresholds were submitted to a 2 (Group) x 2 (Stimulus) mixed-desig ANOVA, takig Group (ADHD vs. ADHD-DCD childre) as the betwee subject factor ad Stimulus (toes vs. music) as the withi-subject factor. Neither the mai effects of Group ad Stimulus, or their iteractio was sigificat [Fs < 1]. Fially, eve if a tedecy was apparet for childre with ADHD-DCD to perform worse tha childre with ADHD o the BAT, this differece did ot reach sigificace [t (31.8) = 1.71, P = 0.098, d = 0.57].

3 3 Table S1. Results obtaied by ADHD ad ADHD-DCD childre o all perceptual tasks of BAASTA. Statistical comparisos of the two subgroups are reported. Task ADHD ADHD-DCD Duratio discrimiatio (threshold) Aisochroy detectio (threshold) BAT (d ) With toes With music (2.79) (1.35) (2.16) (0.20) (3.45) (1.79) (2.64) (0.14) 17 t value (df) 1.16 (28.70) P (35.00) (24.00) (31.80) 0.09 Compariso of ADHD childre ad adults BAT performace The performace of childre (pooled data for ADHD ad ADHD-DCD sub-groups) ad adults with ADHD o the BAT at the three tempos (450, 600, ad 750-ms Iter-Beat-Iterval, IBI) is summarized i Figure S1. The discrimiability idex (d ) was etered i a 2 (Age) x 2 (Group) x 3 (Tempo) mixed-desig ANOVA. Age (childre vs. adults) ad Group (ADHD vs. cotrols) were the betwee-subject factors, ad Tempo (450 vs. 600 vs. 750-ms IBI), the withisubject factor. Childre overall had more difficulties tha adults to detect misaliged beats [mai effect of Age, F (1,85) = 51.11, P < , η 2 partial = 0.38]. The performace differed as a fuctio of Tempo [mai effect of Tempo; F (2,170) = 7.41, P < 0.001, η 2 partial = 0.07]. All participats showed worse performace with music at the fast tempo (450-ms IBI) tha at the average tempo [vs. 600-ms IBI, t (88) = 3.17, P < 0.01, d = 0.18], or at the slow tempo [vs. 750-ms IBI, t (88) = 3.78, P < 0.001, d = 0.22]. Iteractios betwee the aforemetioed factors did ot reach sigificace. Figure S1. Performaces of childre ad adults o the BAT (i.e., d' at 450-ms, 600-ms, ad 750-ms IBI). Error bars are SEM.

4 4 Tappig to the beat Childre performace whe they tapped to the beat of toe sequeces (a metroome) is summarized i Figure S2. To assess whether their performace o this task varied as a fuctio of stimulus rate (or beat tempo), sychroizatio cosistecy (followig logit trasformatio) was etered i a 3 (Group) x 3 (Tempo) mixed-desig ANOVA. Group (ADHD vs. ADHD-DCD vs. cotrols) was the betwee-subject factor, ad Tempo (450 vs 600 vs 750-ms Iter-Stimulus- Iterval, IOI), the withi-subject factor. A mai effect of Group was foud [F (2,51) = 17.60, P < , η 2 partial = 0.41], cofirmig the results of a previous ANOVA takig the average performace across tempos. Neither the effect of Tempo [F (2,102) = 2.15, P = 0.12, η 2 partial = 0.04] or the Group x Tempo iteractio [F (4,102) = 1.15, P = 0.34, η 2 partial = 0.04] reached sigificace. Figure S2. Performaces obtaied by childre (Cotrols, childre with ADHD, ad childre with ADHD-DCD) i the paced tappig task with toes sequeces at the three tempos. Error bars idicate SEM. Compariso of ADHD childre ad adults tappig performace The performace of childre ad adults i the upaced tappig task was aalyzed first. The mea of the iter-tap itervals (ITIs) ad the coefficiet of variatio of the ITI (i.e., SD of the ITI / mea ITI) were calculated. The mea ITI idicates the tappig rate, ad the coefficiet of variatio of the ITI a measure of motor variability. tappig rate ad motor variability for childre ad adults are reported i Figure S3. Tappig rate ad motor variability were submitted to separate 2 (Age) x 2 (Group) ANOVAs. Both Age (childre vs. adults) ad Group (ADHD vs. cotrols) were betwee-subject factors. No differeces were foud i terms of tappig rate betwee childre ad adults [mai effect of Age, F (1,88) = 1.02, P = 0.32, η 2 partial = 0.01], ad betwee ADHD ad cotrols [mea effect of Group, F < 1]. The Age x Group iteractio was ot sigificat [F < 1]. However, differeces were observed i terms of motor variability. Childre were more variable tha adults [mai effect of Age, F (1,88) = 12.29, P < 0.001, η 2 partial = 0.12] ad participats with ADHD were more variable tha cotrols [mai effect of Group, F (1,88) = 11.51, P = 0.001, η 2 partial = 0.12]. The Age x Group iteractio just failed to reach

5 5 sigificace [F (1,88) = 3.70, P = 0.06, η 2 partial = 0.04], suggestig that the differece betwee ADHD participats ad cotrols may be more importat for childre tha for adults. Note that this differece may be biased by the presece of childre with DCD amog childre with ADHD. Ideed, whe the same aalysis was repeated cosiderig oly childre with ADHD without DCD, the differece betwee ADHD participats ad cotrols was o more sigificat [F (1,69) = 1.54, P = 0.22, η 2 partial = 0.02]. Differeces betwee adults ad childre i the paced tappig tasks were tested by comparig adults with ADHD to childre with ADHD (without DCD) ad their respective cotrols. This esured ubiased compariso of childre ad adults, give that a differece was foud betwee ADHD ad ADHD-DCD childre i the tappig tasks. Sychroizatio cosistecy (after logit trasformatio) was submitted to a 2 (Age) x 2 (Group) x 2 (Stimulus) mixed-desig ANOVA. Age (childre vs. adults) ad Group (ADHD participats vs. cotrols) were the betwee-subject factors, ad Stimulus (toes vs. music), the withi-subject factor. The aalysis showed mai effects of Age [F (1,70) = 61.45, P < , η 2 partial = 0.47], Group [F (1,70) = 50.15, P < , η 2 partial = 0.42], ad Stimulus [F (1,70) = 25.99, P < , η 2 partial = 0.27]. Moreover, there were two sigificat iteractios betwee Age ad Stimulus [F (1,70) = 5.31, P < 0.05, η 2 partial = 0.07], ad betwee Group ad Stimulus [F (1,70) = 24.22, P < , η 2 partial = 0.26]. The triple iteractio did ot reach sigificace. To cotrol for the aforemetioed group differeces i motor variability, a ANCOVA was ru i which the same factors as above were cosidered ad motor variability, obtaied from the upaced tappig task, was take as a covariate. The mai effects of Age, Group, ad Stimulus remaied highly sigificat as a result of the ANCOVA (Ps < 0.01). The iteractio betwee Group ad Stimulus was still highly sigificat [F (1,67) = 17.72, P < , η 2 partial = 0.21]. This was ot the case for the Age x Stimulus iteractio [F (1,67) = 3.34, P = 0.07, η 2 partial = 0.05]. Figure S3. Tappig rate (mea ITI) ad motor variability (CV of the ITIs) for childre (A) ad adults (B) obtaied i the upaced tappig task.

6 6 Idividual differeces Further tests were coducted to tests whether childre with ADHD, divided ito good ad poor beat trackers, differed o measures of I.Q., selective, divided, sustaied, auditory, short-term memory, ihibitio, ad flexibility. These measures are reported i Table S2. The discrepacies of the sample sizes for the differet tasks result from the iability of some childre to complete all the tasks util the ed of the sessio due to evidet fatigue or restless behavior. No sigificat differeces betwee good ad poor beat trackers were foud o all tasks, except for ihibitio. Table S2. Average measures i cogitive tests for ADHD childre idetified as good ad poor beat trackers. Measure Poor beat trackers Good beat trackers t value (df) P I.Q (3.56) (3.98) (23.54) 0.25 Short-term memory (1.75) (3.27) (17.60) 0.22 Selective (6.88) (7.58) (36.16) 0.36 Divided (5.29) (7.04) (30.40) 0.93 Sustaied (6.31) 21 27,00 (6.30) (34.31) 0.59 Auditory (7.40) (8.47) (32.13) 0.93 Potetial ifluece of geder ad hyperactivity o beat-trackig measures To test whether differeces betwee females ad males affected the results i the differet groups, factorial ANOVAs were ru o the differet measures of beat trackig i adults (total d- prime for the BAT, paced tappig with music ad metroome, ad upaced tappig) by takig both Group ad Geder as betwee-subject factors. The aalyses showed o sigificat effects of Geder (for BAT, paced tappig, ad upaced tappig, Fs < 1), or iteractios betwee Geder ad Group (for BAT ad upaced tappig, Fs < 1; paced tappig, [F (1,90) = 3.23, P = 0.08, η 2 partial = 0.03]). I additio, to assess the potetial ifluece of hyperactivity i the ADHD adult group, a compariso of adults with combied type with those showig a predomiat iattetive type was ru o the same beat-trackig measures. Noe of these differece reached sigificace, thus showig that the presece of hyperactivity did ot sigificatly ifluece our results (for BAT, paced tappig, ad upaced tappig, ts < 1).

7 7 Referece Dalla Bella, S., Farrugia, N., Beoit, C.E., Bégel, V., Verga, L., Hardig, E., Kotz, S.A. BAASTA: Battery for the Assessmet of Auditory Sesorimotor ad Timig Abilities. Behav Res Methods, 49(3), (2017).