Abstract
It is well documented that ADHD is associated with challenges in inhibitory control. However, the underlying cognitive mechanisms that give rise to these difficulties are not well established. Here, we employ a novel “forced-response” method with computational modeling to disentangle the time-dependent control of habitual and goal-directed processing in response-conflict tasks in adults with ADHD. We use a converging approach which compares individuals with ADHD against neurotypical individuals and individuals with ADHD off medication against on medication on two conflict tasks (Simon and Flanker). The forced-response method tracks moment-to-moment cognitive processing from stimulus to response, and data from this method was modeled using a computational model that distinguishes the temporal dynamics of habitual and goal-directed processes. Converging results revealed that ADHD was associated with delayed goal-directed processing but not rushed habitual processing when compared to both neurotypical individuals and to the same individuals on medication in both conflict tasks. These findings mark an important step toward elucidating the underlying mechanisms that lead to real-life challenges in inhibiting distracting information in adults with ADHD.
Data availability
Raw and Processed Data used in this study are available on Open Science Framework ([https://osf.io/dw574/](https:/osf.io/dw574)).
Code availability
The code used in this study is openly available on Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/dw574/).
References
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-5 (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).
Ayano, G. et al. Prevalence of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in adults: Umbrella review of evidence generated across the globe. Psychiatry Res. 328, 115449 (2023).
Polanczyk, G., De Lima, M. S., Horta, B. L., Biederman, J. & Rohde, L. A. The worldwide prevalence of ADHD: A systematic review and metaregression analysis. AJP 164, 942–948 (2007).
Staley, B. S. Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder diagnosis, treatment, and telehealth use in adults — National Center for Health Statistics Rapid Surveys System, United States, October–November 2023. MMWR. Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7340a1 (2024).
Fletcher, J. M. & Wolfe, B. L. Long-Term Consequences of Childhood ADHD on Criminal Activities. SSRN J. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1489147 (2009).
Kuriyan, A. B. et al. Young adult educational and vocational outcomes of children diagnosed with ADHD. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 41, 27–41 (2013).
Lustig, C., Hasher, L. & Zacks, R. T. Inhibitory deficit theory: Recent developments in a ‘new view.’ In Inhibition in cognition 145–162 (American Psychological Association, 2007). https://doi.org/10.1037/11587-008.
Barkley, R. A. Behavioral inhibition, sustained attention, and executive functions: Constructing a unifying theory of ADHD. Psychol. Bull. 121, 65–94 (1997).
Jonkman, L. et al. Perceptual and response interference in children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, and the effects of methylphenidate. Psychophysiology 36, 419–429 (1999).
Vaidya, C. J. et al. Altered neural substrates of cognitive control in childhood ADHD: Evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging. Am. J. Psychiatry 162, 1605–1613 (2005).
Gohil, K., Bluschke, A., Roessner, V., Stock, A.-K. & Beste, C. ADHD patients fail to maintain task goals in face of subliminally and consciously induced cognitive conflicts. Psychol. Med. 47, 1771–1783 (2017).
Suarez, I. et al. Deciphering interference control in adults with ADHD by using distribution analyses and electromyographic activity. Acta Psychol. 159, 85–92 (2015).
McLaughlin, E. N. Cognitive inhibition in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. http://hdl.handle.net/10222/55856 (2002).
Konrad, K., Neufang, S., Hanisch, C., Fink, G. R. & Herpertz-Dahlmann, B. Dysfunctional attentional networks in children with Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Evidence from an event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Biol. Psychiatry 59, 643–651 (2006).
Sparkes, S. J. The influence of ADHD and experimental context on components of attention in children. http://hdl.handle.net/10222/54849 (2006).
Tucha, O. et al. Effects of methylphenidate on multiple components of attention in children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Psychopharmacology 185, 315–326 (2006).
Hasler, R. et al. Attention-related EEG markers in adult ADHD. Neuropsychologia 87, 120–133 (2016).
Johnson, K. A. et al. Impaired conflict resolution and alerting in children with ADHD: Evidence from the Attention Network Task (ANT). J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry 49, 1339–1347 (2008).
Banich, M. T. et al. The neural basis of sustained and transient attentional control in young adults with ADHD. Neuropsychologia 47, 3095–3104 (2009).
Mullane, J. C., Corkum, P. V., Klein, R. M. & McLaughlin, E. Interference control in children with and without ADHD: A systematic review of Flanker and Simon task performance. Child Neuropsychol. 15, 321–342 (2009).
Senderecka, M., Grabowska, A., Szewczyk, J., Gerc, K. & Chmylak, R. Response inhibition of children with ADHD in the stop-signal task: An event-related potential study. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 85, 93–105 (2012).
Ridderinkhof, K. R., Wylie, S. A., van den Wildenberg, W. P. M., Bashore, T. R. & van der Molen, M. W. The arrow of time: Advancing insights into action control from the arrow version of the Eriksen flanker task. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 83, 700–721 (2021).
Ging-Jehli, N. R., Ratcliff, R. & Arnold, L. E. Improving neurocognitive testing using computational psychiatry-A systematic review for ADHD. Psychol. Bull. 147, 169–231 (2021).
Draheim, C., Mashburn, C. A., Martin, J. D. & Engle, R. W. Reaction time in differential and developmental research: A review and commentary on the problems and alternatives. Psychol. Bull. 145, 508–535 (2019).
Lee, T. G., Sellers, J., Jonides, J. & Zhang, H. The forced-response method: A new chronometric approach to measure conflict processing. Behav. Res. 57, 15 (2024).
Wiecki, T. V. & Frank, M. J. A computational model of inhibitory control in frontal cortex and basal ganglia. Psychol. Rev. 120, 329–355 (2013).
Hardwick, R. M., Forrence, A. D., Krakauer, J. W. & Haith, A. M. Time-dependent competition between goal-directed and habitual response preparation. Nat. Hum. Behav. 3, 1252–1262 (2019).
Adkins, T. J. & Lee, T. G. Reward Accelerates the Preparation of Goal-directed Actions under Conflict. J. Cogn. Neurosci. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_02072 (2022).
Hardwick, R. M., Forrence, A. D., Costello, M. G., Zackowski, K. & Haith, A. M. Age-related increases in reaction time result from slower preparation, not delayed initiation. J. Neurophysiol. 128, 582–592 (2022).
Wong, A. L., Goldsmith, J., Forrence, A. D., Haith, A. M. & Krakauer, J. W. Reaction times can reflect habits rather than computations. eLife 6, e28075 (2017).
Zhang, H., Sellers, J., Lee, T. G. & Jonides, J. The temporal dynamics of visual attention. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 154, 435–456 (2025).
Haith, A. M., Pakpoor, J. & Krakauer, J. W. Independence of movement preparation and movement initiation. J. Neurosci. 36, 3007–3015 (2016).
Mansfield, K. L., Van Der Molen, M. W., Falkenstein, M. & Van Boxtel, G. J. M. Temporal dynamics of interference in Simon and Eriksen tasks considered within the context of a dual-process model. Brain. Cogn. 82, 353–363 (2013).
Mittelstädt, V., Ulrich, R., König, J., Hofbauer, K. & Mackenzie, I. G. The influence of reward in the Simon task: Differences and similarities to the Stroop and Eriksen flanker tasks. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 85, 949–959 (2023).
Mückschel, M., Stock, A.-K., Dippel, G., Chmielewski, W. & Beste, C. Interacting sources of interference during sensorimotor integration processes. Neuroimage 125, 342–349 (2016).
Hübner, R. & Töbel, L. Conflict resolution in the Eriksen flanker task: Similarities and differences to the Simon task. PLoS One. 14, e0214203 (2019).
Willcutt, E. G., Doyle, A. E., Nigg, J. T., Faraone, S. V. & Pennington, B. F. Validity of the executive function theory of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A meta-analytic review. Biol. Psychiatry. 57, 1336–1346 (2005).
Ridderinkhof, K. R., Scheres, A., Oosterlaan, J. & Sergeant, J. A. Delta plots in the study of individual differences: New tools reveal response inhibition deficits in AD/HD that are eliminated by methylphenidate treatment. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 114, 197–215 (2005).
Ridderinkhof, K. R., van den Wildenberg, W. P. M., Wijnen, J. & Burle, B. Response Inhibition in Conflict Tasks Is Revealed in Delta Plots. In Response Inhibition in Conflict Tasks is Revealed in Delta Plots 369–377 (The Guilford Press, 2004).
Grandjean, A., Suarez, I., Miquee, A., Da Fonseca, D. & Casini, L. Differential response to pharmacological intervention in ADHD furthers our understanding of the mechanisms of interference control. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 38, 138–152 (2021).
Grandjean, A. et al. Stronger impulse capture and impaired inhibition of prepotent action in children with ADHD performing a Simon task: An electromyographic study. Neuropsychology 35, 399–410 (2021).
Zhang, H., Abagis, T. R., Steeby, C. J. & Jonides, J. Lingering on distraction: Examining distractor rejection in adults with ADHD. Vis. Cogn. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2024.2328379 (2024).
Hupfeld, K. E., Abagis, T. R. & Shah, P. Living “in the zone”: Hyperfocus in adult ADHD. ADHD Atten. Def. Hyp. Disord. 11, 191–208 (2019).
Hupfeld, K. E. et al. Validation of the dispositional adult hyperfocus questionnaire (AHQ-D). Sci. Rep. 14, 19460 (2024).
Ginapp, C. M. et al. Dysregulated not deficit: A qualitative study on symptomatology of ADHD in young adults. PLoS One. 18, e0292721 (2023).
Hedge, C., Powell, G. & Sumner, P. The reliability paradox: Why robust cognitive tasks do not produce reliable individual differences. Behav. Res. Methods. 50, 1166–1186 (2018).
Logan, G. D., Cowan, W. B. & Davis, K. A. On the ability to inhibit simple and choice reaction time responses: A model and a method. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 10, 276–291 (1984).
Boucher, L., Palmeri, T. J., Logan, G. D. & Schall, J. D. Inhibitory control in mind and brain: An interactive race model of countermanding saccades. Psychol. Rev. 114, 376–397 (2007).
Lee, P.-S. & Sewell, D. K. A revised diffusion model for conflict tasks. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 31, 1–31 (2024).
Forstmann, B. U., Ratcliff, R. & Wagenmakers, E.-J. Sequential sampling models in cognitive neuroscience: Advantages, applications, and extensions. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 67, 641–666 (2016).
Merkt, J. et al. Flanker performance in female college students with ADHD: A diffusion model analysis. ADHD Atten. Defic. Hyperact. Disord. 5, 321–341 (2013).
Mulder, M. J. et al. Basic impairments in regulating the speed-accuracy tradeoff predict symptoms of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. Biol. Psychiatry 68, 1114–1119 (2010).
Ulrich, R., Schröter, H., Leuthold, H. & Birngruber, T. Automatic and controlled stimulus processing in conflict tasks: Superimposed diffusion processes and delta functions. Cogn. Psychol. 78, 148–174 (2015).
Koob, V., Mackenzie, I., Ulrich, R., Leuthold, H. & Janczyk, M. The role of task-relevant and task-irrelevant information in congruency sequence effects: Applying the diffusion model for conflict tasks. Cogn. Psychol. 140, 101528 (2023).
Luo, C. & Proctor, R. W. A diffusion model for the congruency sequence effect. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 29, 2034–2051 (2022).
Sellers, J., Zhang, H., Jonides, J. & Lee, T. Does global slowing explain age effects in inhibitory control? https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/w7fp9_v1 (2025).
Osborne, J. B., Zhang, H., Carlson, M., Shah, P. & Jonides, J. The association between different sources of distraction and symptoms of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. Front. Psychiatry 14, 1173989 (2023).
Eriksen, B. A. & Eriksen, C. W. Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Percept. Psychophys. 16, 143–149 (1974).
Brissenden, J. A., Adkins, T. J., Hsu, Y. T. & Lee, T. G. Reward Influences the Allocation but Not the Availability of Resources in Visual Working Memory (2023).
Makowski, D., Ben-Shachar, M. S., Chen, S. H. A. & Lüdecke, D. Indices of effect existence and significance in the Bayesian framework. Front. Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02767 (2019).
Abril-Pla, O. et al. PyMC: a modern, and comprehensive probabilistic programming framework in Python. PeerJ Comput. Sci. 9, e1516 (2023).
Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge the members of the Cognitive Neuroimaging Laboratory and Basic and Applied Cognition Laboratory at the University of Michigan, particularly research assistants: Vidhiyaa Harish, Shahad Hilal, and Seoyoon Chang, who helped with facilitating study recruitment, study administration, data organization, and other logistical tasks. Their dedication and effort were integral for the progression and completion of this study. Next, we would like to acknowledge faculty and graduate students of the Department of Psychology at the University of Michigan for helpful comments and discussion, particularly Taraz Lee, Andras Molnar, Kane York, Madelyn Quirk, Madison Fansher, and Atakan Atamer. This project was supported by funding from the National Institute of Mental Health (R21MH129909) and the National Science Foundation (2238151)to J.J. and Rackham Graduate Student Research Grants from the University of Michigan to J. O.
Funding
This project was supported by funding from the National Institute of Mental Health (R21MH129909) and the National Science Foundation (2238151) to J.J. and Rackham Graduate Student Research Grants from the University of Michigan to J. O.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Project conception: J.O., J.J., P.S.; Methodology: J.O., J.S., H.Z., P.S., and J.J.; Data Collection: J.O., S.L.; Analysis and Interpretation: J.O., J.S., H.Z., S.W., S.L., S.S., P.S., and J.J.; Manuscript writing: J.O., J.S., H.Z., S.W., S.L., S.S., P.S., and J.J.; Funding acquisition: J.J., and J.O.; Supervision: P.S., and J.J.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Osborne, J.B., Sellers, J., Zhang, H. et al. Delayed goal-directed processing underlies inhibitory control challenges in adult ADHD. Sci Rep (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-42307-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-42307-3
