# Tele-Assessment of Executive Functions in Young Adults with ADHD: A Pilot Study
## 7 Results  
The results are first presented concerning the general indices of executive functioning, which provide a descriptive profile of young adults with ADHD compared to their typically developing peers. This is followed by a more detailed analysis of group differences in specific indices. The analysis of normality revealed that not all variables were normally distributed. Response inhibition showed a significant group difference in accuracy (\(\chi^{2}\) = 4.74, \(p\) = 0.030, \(\xi\) = 0.070), with young adults with ADHD performing significantly worse than their typically developing counterparts. No significant differences in reaction times were found (\(p\) > 0.05, see Table 1 and Figure 1). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Measures**} & **Mean (SD)** & **Mean (SD)** & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\chi^{2}\)} & **gdl** & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\varepsilon^{2}\)} \\  & **ADHD Group** & **TD Group** & & & & \\ \hline RI accuracy & \multirow{2}{*}{73.7 (21.40)} & \multirow{2}{*}{82.3 (22.89)} & \multirow{2}{*}{4.736} & \multirow{2}{*}{1} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.030 \({}^{*}\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.06964} \\ percentile & & & & & & \\ RI reaction & \multirow{2}{*}{74.5 (21.30)} & \multirow{2}{*}{74.4 (26.65)} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.127} & \multirow{2}{*}{1} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.722} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.00189} \\ time & & & & & & \\ percentile & & & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note: RI = response inhibition; SD = Standard Deviation;* significant.  
\end{table} 
Table 1: Non-parametric ANOVA with Kruskal–Wallis for response inhibition (RI). Regarding interference control, no significant group differences were observed for either the accuracy or reaction time index (\(p>0.05\), see Table 2 and Figure 2). For cognitive flexibility, the difference in accuracy between the two groups approached statistical significance (\(\chi^{2}=3.19\), \(p=0.074\), \(\xi=0.047\)), with young adults with ADHD showing a worse performance compared to their typically developing peers, whereas no significant differences in the reaction time were found (\(p>0.05\), see Table 3 and Figure 3). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Measures**} & **Mean (SD)** & **Mean (SD)** & \multirow{2}{*}{\(\chi^{2}\)} & **gdl** & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\)} & \(\varepsilon^{2}\) \\  & **ADHD Group** & & **TD Group** & & & \\ \hline IC accuracy & \multirow{2}{*}{51.0 (23.99)} & \multirow{2}{*}{60.0 (21.73)} & \multirow{2}{*}{2.780} & \multirow{2}{*}{1} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.095} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.04088} \\ percentile & & & & & & \\ IC reaction & \multirow{2}{*}{76.8 (30.62)} & \multirow{2}{*}{81.3 (28.99)} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.520} & \multirow{2}{*}{1} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.471} & \multirow{2}{*}{0.00765} \\ time & & & & & & \\ percentile & & & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note: IC = interference control; SD = Standard Deviation.  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Non-parametric ANOVA with Kruskal–Wallis for interference control (IC). Figure 1: Box plots comparing the group with ADHD and the TD group on Response Inhibition (RI) in accuracy and reaction time. Figure 2: Box plots comparing the group with ADHD and the TD group on Interference Control (IC) in accuracy and reaction time. In the case of working memory, a significant difference emerged between the two groups for the reaction time in the high-cognitive-load condition (\(\chi^{2}\) = 4.66, \(p\) = 0.031, \(\xi\) = 0.070), with young adults with ADHD showing a slower performance compared to their typically developing peers. No significant differences were found for either the accuracy or reaction time in the low-cognitive-load condition (\(p\) > 0.05, see Table 4 and Figure 4).