| Abstract: | Overactive and distractible youngsters who underachieve in school often represent a large proportion of child clinical populations. The hypothesis that these children suffer from minor neurological impairments not demonstrable through conventional neurodiagnostic methods enjoys widespread influence. Proponents of this minimal brain dysfunction viewpoint typically admit that there is little direct evidence to support their position, yet they tend to minimize its weaknesses and dangers. Attention to the literature in this field reveals numerous pitfalls that can be avoided by alternative cognitive–developmental hypotheses. These alternative interpretations do not ignore relevant brain–behavior relationships, but their tenets are more consistent with the available evidence and may ultimately lead to improved strategies of intervention. (72 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
