RESULTS Modafinil appears to improve reaction time ( P ≤ 0.04 ) , logical reasoning ( P ≤ 0.05 ) and problem-solving .
Across all three types of prescription stimulants , research shows improved attention with lack of consensus on whether these improvements are limited to simple versus complex tasks in varying youth population s. CONCLUSIONS The heterogeneity of the non-attention deficit hyperactivity disorder youth population , the variation in cognitive task characteristics and lack of replication of studies makes assessing the potential global neurocognitive benefits of stimulants among non-attention deficit hyperactivity disorder youth difficult ; however , some youth may derive benefit in specific cognitive domains
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Increasing prescription stimulant abuse among youth without diagnoses of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder ( ADHD ) is of concern .
The most frequently cited motive for abuse is improved academic achievement via neurocognitive enhancement .
Our aim in review ing the literature was to identify neurocognitive effects of prescription stimulants in non-ADHD youth .
Interaction of expectancy and the pharmacological effects ofd-amphetamine: subjective effects and self-administration
The study examined the effects of expectation on the subjective effects and oral self-administration of 15 mgd-amphetamine ( AMP ) and placebo in 40 volunteers who reported no prior use of stimulants other than caffeine . A balanced placebo design was used to create four groups : told Placebo/got Placebo ( P/P ) , told Placebo/got Stimulant ( P/S ) , told Stimulant/got Placebo ( S/P ) , told Stimulant/got Stimulant ( S/S ) . There were three sessions . On one session ( INFO ) , participants received a capsule containing AMP or placebo and were given information about the contents of the capsule according to the balanced placebo design . On another session ( NO INFO ) , participants received no information about the capsule 's contents and were given placebo . On the final session , participants were allowed to choose either the INFO or NO INFO capsule . Participants came to the laboratory to ingest their capsules , and then returned to their normal environments where they completed subjective effects question naires every 2 h for 8 h. Expectancies influenced the subjective effects reported during the INFO session , regardless of whether subjects actually received AMP or placebo : subjects who expected a stimulant had higher ratings of “ feel drug ” and “ like drug ” . The pharmacological effects of AMP were also evident on the INFO sessions : AMP produced its prototypic subjective effects regardless of subjects ' expectancies . Significant interactions between drug and expectancy were obtained on self-report measures of anxiety and arousal : anxiety was higher for groups who received substances that did not match their expectations ( P/S and S/P ) and arousal increased most in volunteers who expected placebo but received stimulant . Choice of drug was determined primarily by pharmacology : participants who received AMP on the INFO session usually chose that capsule , regardless of information about its identity ( P/S : 8/10 ; S/S : 9/10 ) . In contrast , participants who received placebo on the INFO session chose this capsule at chance levels , regardless of information about its identity ( S/P : 3/10 ; P/P : 6/10 ) . Thus , expectancy influenced some of the subjective effects of AMP and placebo , but the pharmacological effects of the AMP were instrumental in determining whether volunteers would self-administer the drug
RESULTS Modafinil appears to improve reaction time ( P ≤ 0.04 ) , logical reasoning ( P ≤ 0.05 ) and problem-solving .
Across all three types of prescription stimulants , research shows improved attention with lack of consensus on whether these improvements are limited to simple versus complex tasks in varying youth population s. CONCLUSIONS The heterogeneity of the non-attention deficit hyperactivity disorder youth population , the variation in cognitive task characteristics and lack of replication of studies makes assessing the potential global neurocognitive benefits of stimulants among non-attention deficit hyperactivity disorder youth difficult ; however , some youth may derive benefit in specific cognitive domains
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Increasing prescription stimulant abuse among youth without diagnoses of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder ( ADHD ) is of concern .
The most frequently cited motive for abuse is improved academic achievement via neurocognitive enhancement .
Our aim in review ing the literature was to identify neurocognitive effects of prescription stimulants in non-ADHD youth .