1. The Potential Mediating Role of Emotion Dysregulation
Sluggish Cognitive Tempo (SCT) and Poor Academic Adjustment to College:
The Potential Mediating Role of Emotion Dysregulation
Andrew J. Flannery, Emily E. Padgett, Kristina Kochanova, Micah Ioffe, & Laura D. Pittman
Northern Illinois University
Background
Results
Sluggish Cognitive Tempo (SCT) is characterized by symptoms of excessive daydreaming, lethargy, and mental confusion (see Becker et al., 2014). Early research suggested that SCT may help identify individuals displaying attentional problems with few symptoms of hyperactivity-impulsivity (Carlson & Mann, 2002). Studies have shown SCT to be statistically distinct from symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), depression, anxiety, and daytime sleepiness (e.g., Becker, 2013).
A recent longitudinal study demonstrated that symptoms of SCT increase from childhood to adolescence (Leopold et al., 2016).Research has also indicated higher prevalence rates of SCT in college student samples (e.g., 13%; Wood et al., 2014) compared to child and adult samples (see Barkley, 2012; 2013).
Two studies have demonstrated links between SCT and college students’ poor academic functioning, beyond ADHD symptoms (Becker, Langberg, et al., 2014; Langberg et al., 2014).
This study investigates the associations between SCT, academic adjustment to college, and emotion dysregulation, by considering the influence of emotion dysregulation as a mediator.
Table 1. Hierarchical Regression Models of Psychopathology Dimensions in Relation to Emotion Dysregulation.
Figure 1. Indirect Effects Model of SCT Predicting Academic Adjustment to College via Difficulties in Emotion Regulation.
Step 1 Model Summary
Step 2 Model Summary
Dependent variable
Independent variables b SE β t
Difficulties in Emotion Regulation
F(7, 150) = 19.86***; R2 = .48
Age
0.02
0.04
0.03
0.44
Sex
0.08
0.06
0.97
Anxiety
0.12
0.10
1.09
Depression
0.46
0.42
4.48***
ADHD-IN
0.26
0.09
0.22
2.82**
ADHD-HYP
0.07
0.95
ADHD-IMP
0.32
SCT -- b SE β t
F(8, 149) = 18.53***; R2 = .50, ΔR2 = .02*
0.02
0.04
0.03
0.42
0.05
0.08
0.65
0.12
0.06
0.43
0.10
0.39
4.24***
0.09
0.07
0.75
0.98
0.23
0.22
2.30*
Emotion Dysregulation
a = 0.23, SE = 0.10,
t = 2.30*
b = -0.30, SE = 0.14,
t = -2.21*
Indirect Effect: ab = -0.07, SE = %CI: (-0.20, )
Sluggish Cognitive Tempo
Academic Adjustment to College
Total Effect: c = -0.81, SE = .17, t = -4.79***
Direct Effect: c’ = -0.74, SE = 0.17, t = -4.36***
Table 2. Hierarchical Regression Models of Psychopathology Dimensions in Relation to Academic Motivation.
Step 1 Model Summary
Step 2 Model Summary
Academic Motivation
F(7, 150) = 8.95***; R2 = .30
Age
0.02
0.08
0.22
Sex
0.49
0.17
0.21
2.88**
Anxiety
0.48
0.24
2.00*
Depression
-0.67
-0.34
-3.13**
ADHD-IN
-0.62
0.19
-0.29
-3.26**
ADHD-HYP
0.15
0.18
0.82
ADHD-IMP
0.14
-0.16
-2.03*
SCT --
F(8, 149) = 8.67***; R2 = .32, ΔR2 = .02*
0.02
0.08
0.25
0.55
0.17
0.23
3.20**
0.58
0.24
0.26
2.40*
-0.61
0.21
-0.31
-2.89**
-0.27
-0.13
-1.13
0.15
0.18
0.07
0.82
-0.30
0.14
-0.17
-2.16*
-0.47
-0.25
-2.24*
* p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
Participants and Procedure
Discussion
Participants were:
Undergraduate students from a Midwestern University (N = 158)
Ages 18 to 23 (M = 19.05, SD = 1.00)
64% female, 36% male
84% of the sample is Caucasian, 7% Asian/Asian-American, 5% African American, and 3% Multiracial
Participants completed study measures individually on a computer in a university laboratory.
Hierarchical regression analyses revealed that symptoms of Depression and ADHD-Inattention (ADHD-IN) were significantly positively associated with Emotion Dysregulation. However, when SCT was added to the model, ADHD-IN was reduced to nonsignificance and SCT was found to be positively associated with Emotion Dysregulation (β = .22, p = .02; See Table 1).
Anxiety, depression, ADHD-IN, and ADHD-Impulsivity (ADHD-IMP) demonstrated a significant negative association with Academic Motivation. When SCT was added to the model, ADHD-IN dropped to nonsignificance and SCT showed a significant negative association with Academic Motivation (β = -.25, p =.03; See Table 2).
ADHD-IN was the only variable significantly negatively associated with Academic Application, but when SCT was added to the model, this relationship became nonsignificant (See Table 3).
ADHD-IN was the only variable significantly associated with Academic Performance, but when SCT was added to the model, this relationship became nonsignificant and SCT became the only psychopathology dimension significantly associated with Academic Performance (See Table 4).
ADHD-IN initially demonstrated the only significant association with overall academic adjustment. When SCT was added to the model, this relationship became nonsignificant and SCT became the only variable significantly associated with overall Academic Adjustment (β = -.49, p < .001; See Table 5).
The PROCESS macro (Hayes, 2013) was used to test the relationship between SCT, Emotion Dysregulation, and overall Academic Adjustment to college. Results demonstrated that SCT was both directly associated with academic adjustment and indirectly associated with Academic Adjustment via Emotion Dysregulation (See Figure 1).
The present study demonstrates that SCT is associated with late adolescents’ adaptation to college, particularly with respect to academic adjustment. Additionally, SCT revealed a positive association with emotion dysregulation, and this pathway presented a partial, but significant indirect influence on the relationship between SCT and academic adjustment.
Table 3. Hierarchical Regression Models of Psychopathology Dimensions in Relation to Academic Application.
Step 1 Model Summary
Step 2 Model Summary
Academic Application
F(7, 150) = 4.64***; R2 = .18
Age
-0.12
0.10
-0.09
-1.17
Sex
0.25
0.21
1.22
Anxiety
0.04
0.29
0.01
0.12
Depression
-0.003
0.26
-0.001
-0.01
ADHD-IN
-0.85
0.23
-0.36
-3.68***
ADHD-HYP
0.16
0.22
0.07
0.74
ADHD-IMP
-0.28
0.17
-0.14
-1.58
SCT --
F(8, 149) = 4.51***; R2 = .20, ΔR2 = .02
-0.11
0.10
-0.09
-1.15
0.31
0.21
0.12
1.47
0.13
0.29
0.05
0.45
0.26
0.02
0.19
-0.52
0.30
-0.22
-1.74
0.16
0.22
0.07
0.74
-0.29
0.17
-0.14
-1.67
-0.45
-1.77
Measures
Demographics included gender, age, race, and ethnicity
The Barkley Adult ADHD Rating Scale-IV (BAARS-IV; Barkley, 2011) was used to assess DSM- 5 symptoms of SCT and ADHD. Four subscales:
SCT subscale (e.g., easily confused;  = .75).
ADHD-Inattention subscale: (e.g., easily distracted;  = .87).
ADHD-Hyperactivity subscale: (e.g., fidgets with hands or feet;  = .68).
ADHD-Impulsivity subscale: (e.g., blurts out answers;  = .83).
Depression Anxiety Stress Scales-21 (DASS-21; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995) was used to measure symptoms of anxiety and depression.
Anxiety subscale: 7 items measuring symptoms of arousal, situational anxiety, and subjective experience of anxious affect ( = .83).
Depression subscale: 7 items assessing symptoms of dysphoria, hopelessness, and anhedonia ( = .89).
Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS; Gratz & Roemer, 2004) was used to measure emotion dysregulation. Due to high correlations among subscales, the overall DERS score ( = .94) was used for the present analysis.
Three subscales and one broadband scale of the Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire (SACQ; Baker & Siryk, 1999) were used to measure academic functioning.
Motivation: attitudes toward academic goals/work related to college ( = .62).
Application: how well a student is applying him/herself to academic demands of college ( = .61).
Performance: the students’ productivity, efficiency, and academic performance ( = .75).
Broadband academic adjustment scale: combines the three subscales and examines a student’s success at coping with the educational demands of college ( = .82).
Table 4. Hierarchical Regression Models of Psychopathology Dimensions in Relation to Academic Performance.
Step 1 Model Summary
Step 2 Model Summary
Academic Performance
F(7, 150) = 10.46***; R2 = .33
Age
0.11
0.09
0.08
1.14
Sex
0.26
0.19
1.32
Anxiety
-0.41
0.27
-0.15
-1.50
Depression
-0.02
0.24
-0.01
-0.08
ADHD-IN
-1.13
0.22
-0.46
-5.23***
ADHD-HYP
-0.11
0.21
-0.05
-0.52
ADHD-IMP
0.16
1.01
SCT --
F(8, 149) = 14.92***; R2 = .44, ΔR2 = .11***
0.11
0.09
0.08
1.31
0.40
0.18
0.15
2.21*
-0.15
0.25
-0.06
-0.60
0.12
0.22
0.05
0.55
-0.24
0.26
-0.10
-0.95
-0.11
0.19
-0.05
-0.59
0.13
0.06
0.86
-1.20
-0.56
-5.44***
Table 5. Hierarchical Regression Models of Psychopathology Dimensions in Relation to Academic Adjustment.
Step 1 Model Summary
Step 2 Model Summary
Academic Adjustment
F(7, 150) = 12.65***; R2 = .37
Age
0.03
0.07
0.45
Sex
0.33
0.15
0.16
2.26*
Anxiety
-0.04
0.21
-0.02
-0.17
Depression
-0.22
0.18
-0.12
-1.21
ADHD-IN
-0.91
-0.48
-5.59***
ADHD-HYP
0.02
0.20
ADHD-IMP
-0.07
0.12
-0.05
-0.59
SCT --
F(8, 149) = 15.56***; R2 = .46, ΔR2 = .09***
0.04
0.07
0.03
0.54
0.43
0.14
0.20
3.08**
0.71
-0.13
0.17
-0.07
-0.73
-0.31
-0.16
-1.58
0.02
0.19
-0.10
0.11
-0.06
-0.85
-0.81
-0.49
-4.79***
Note. For Tables 1-5, N = 158. ADHD = Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. IN = Inattention. HYP = Hyperactivity. IMP = Impulsivity. SCT = sluggish cognitive tempo.
* p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
Please contact Andrew Flannery with comments or questions about this poster at or via the Psychology Department, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL