Performance is substantially better on the Explicit-Assist task than on the No-Explicit-Assist task in both the ADHD and dyslexia comparisons¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 Participants performed significantly better on the Explicit-Assist task than the No-Explicit-Assist task in the ADHD comparison (ηp² = 0.74). → Gabay 2025 q3 i3 Participants performed significantly better on the Explicit-Assist task than the No-Explicit-Assist task in the dyslexia comparison (ηp² = 0.69). → Gabay 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Gabay 2025¶

Gabay, Y., Jacob, L., Mansour, A. & Hertz, U. (2025). Computational markers show specific deficits for dyslexia and ADHD in complex learning settings. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00323-4

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

In the ADHD comparison, the 2 × 2 mixed factorial ANOVA on percentage of games learned showed a large task effect: Explicit-Assist M = 0.79 vs No-Explicit-Assist M = 0.53, F(1, 51) = 147.33, p < 0.001, ηp² = 0.74.

"A 2 × 2 mixed factorial analysis revealed that participants performed significantly better on the Explicit-Assisttask (M = 0.79, S.E. = 0.02) than on theNo-Explicit-Assist task (M = 0.53, S.E. = 0.03) ( F (1, 51) = 147.33, p < 0.001, ηp² = 0.74)"

Gabay 2025 (2)¶

Gabay, Y., Jacob, L., Mansour, A. & Hertz, U. (2025). Computational markers show specific deficits for dyslexia and ADHD in complex learning settings. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00323-4

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

In the dyslexia comparison, the same mixed factorial ANOVA on percentage of games learned showed a large task effect: Explicit-Assist M = .80 vs No-Explicit-Assist M = 0.53, F(1, 41) = 91.52, p < 0.001, ηp² = 0.69.

"A 2 × 2 mixed factorial analysis revealed that participants performed significantly better,F (1, 41) = 91.52,p < 0.001,ηp² = 0.69, on theExplicit-Assisttask (M = .80, S.E. = 0.02) than on the more complexNo-Explicit-Assisttask (M = 0.53, S.E. = 02)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The group-by-task interaction is not significant for either ADHD or dyslexia comparisons, though simple t-tests show task-specific group differences — related
• Adults with dyslexia show heightened decay rates than controls in complex learning settings, indicating quicker discounting of learned associations — related
• Adults with ADHD show reduced reliance on Bayesian inference strategies (lower alpha) than controls in complex learning settings — related
• Adults with ADHD and adults with dyslexia show poorer reinforcement learning performance than matched controls across simple and complex multidimensional tasks — related