How predictive are sex and empathizing-systemizing cognitive style for entry into the academic areas of social or physical sciences?

Based on the Empathizing-Systemizing (E-S) theory, it was hypothesized that the underrepresentation of female students in the physical sciences and the underrepresentation of males in the social sciences relates to differences in E-S cognitive style between the sexes. This hypothesis was tested in 115 physical science students and 155 social science students from a university in the Netherlands. The students completed visuospatial tests and the systemizing quotient-revised (SQ-R) as measures for systemizing, and a Cartoon Prediction test and the empathy quotient (EQ) as measures for empathizing. Independent of sex, the physical science students scored significantly lower than social science students on EQ (with large effect size) and 'brain type' that represents the standardized difference score between EQ and SQ-R (with large effect size). Physical science students, furthermore, scored significantly higher on the Cartoon Prediction task and one of the visuospatial tasks; however, these effects were only small of size. Unlike the scores on the SQ-R and the performance tests, the 'brain type' score of the EQ and SQ-R questionnaires was a good predictor of entry into social or physical sciences. Interestingly, the typical sex differences in more empathizing and less systemizing in females compared to males were only small for EQ and 'brain type', and absent for the SQ-R and the performance tests. This study only partially confirms the E-S theory, because typical sex differences were only minor in this selective sample and only the self-report measures predicted academic area in the absence of a role for sex.

Interaction of attention and graphomotor functions in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

The present article provides a review of a series of studies in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) concerning (1) the effects of methylphenidate on various attentional functions, (2) the stimulant-induced changes of both qualitative and quantitative (i.e. kinematic) aspects of handwriting, (3) the interaction between conscious control of handwriting and fluency of handwriting movements, and (4) possible therapeutic approaches to graphomotor disturbances. Children with ADHD showed impairments in various aspects of attentional functioning. Pharmacological treatment of ADHD children with methylphenidate resulted in marked improvements of various components of attentional functioning. In comparison to the performance following the withdrawal of methylphenidate, children with ADHD on methylphenidate displayed a significant improvement in task accuracy in the areas of vigilance, divided attention, selective attention (inhibition, focused attention and integration of sensory information) and flexibility. However, the comparison with healthy children revealed considerable deficits regarding vigilance, divided attention, flexibility and selective attention (focused attention and integration of sensory information) in children with ADHD on methylphenidate. The comparison of writing movements of children on and off methylphenidate revealed that medication resulted in a better handwriting, but a deterioration in handwriting fluency as assessed by kinematic analysis. Children with ADHD may use their increased attentional capacities to focus on skills (e.g. handwriting) that are independent of conscious control or may even be disturbed by attention. The findings summarized in this paper indicate, therefore, that administration of methylphenidate alone is insufficient in the treatment of children with ADHD. Children with ADHD may benefit from instructions on how to best use their improved attentional capacities.

Neuropsychological assessment of attention in adults with different subtypes of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

There is only little information about varying attention functions of adults with different DSM-IV subtypes of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). In the present study groups of adult patients with ADHD - predominantly inattentive type, ADHD - predominantly hyperactive-impulsive type or ADHD - combined type and three healthy control groups were compared regarding multiple components of attention. Assessment of attention was performed using a computerized neuropsychological test battery for attentional functions. In comparison with healthy subjects, the three patient groups displayed impairments of vigilance, selective attention, divided attention, and flexibility. These impairments of attention of ADHD subgroups were primarily observed with regard to reaction time. With regard to tonic and phasic alertness no differences between patient and control groups could be found. Comparison between ADHD subgroups revealed that DSM-IV subtypes of ADHD differ in measures of divided attention, selective attention and flexibility. Differences between ADHD subgroups were primarily observed with regard to task accuracy. The results suggest that while distinct profiles of attentional functioning were observed between adult patients with ADHD and healthy adults indicating gross disturbances of various attention functions in patients with ADHD, differences between ADHD subgroups were only weak.