|
Conners CATA® measures a respondent’s performance in areas of inattentiveness, impulsivity, and sustained attention.
Benefits
- Helps evaluate attention disorders and neurological functioning
- Easy-to-interpret reports that offer clear visuals and summaries of scores
- Trusted results with the most representative CPT normative samples collected
- Easy-to-understand clinical likelihood statements that are based on T-scores and displayed as very high, high, moderate, or minimal
- Descriptive information about the respondent’s auditory laterality and mobility
- Results sorted by block
- Provides objective information about an individual’s performance in attention tasks, complementing information obtained from rating scales such as the Conners 3
- Can be used in conjunction with Conners CPT 3™
- The computer-generated scoring reports have been designed to guide assessors through each step of the recommended interpretation process
Features
- During the 14-minute, 200-trial administration, respondents are presented with high-tone sounds that are either preceded by a low-tone warning sound (warned trials) or played alone (unwarned trials)
- Respondents are instructed to respond only to high-tone sounds on warned trials, and to ignore those on unwarned trials
- On most trials, the low-tone and the high-tone sounds are played in the same ear (non-switch trials)
- On switch trials, the low-tone warning sound and the high-tone target sound are played in different ears, requiring the respondent to shift auditory attention from one ear to the other
- The Conners CATA is available as an unlimited use program or pay-per-use for one computer. The number of computers that can use the program is limited to the number of installations purchased
- Assessment Report provides detailed results from a single administration
- Progress Report provides an overview of change over time by combining and comparing results of up to four administrations
Reliability and validity
- Helps detect attention deficits and differentiate Clinical from Non-Clinical Cases
- Yields consistent and stable scores across administrations
- Strong split-half reliability estimates across all scores, the median split-half reliability estimate was .95 for the norm and clinical samples (all correlations were significant, p < .001). Results indicate that the Conners CATA demonstrates excellent internal consistency for both the normative and the clinical groups
- A sample of 69 respondents from the general population completed the Conners CATA twice with a 1- to 4-week interval between administrations. The median test-retest correlation was .64. Results suggest a good level of test-retest reliability
- Discriminative validity analyses undertaken with differences found between the ADHD sample and the matched general population sample on most measures with small to moderate effect sizes (d = 0.10 to 0.63)
- ADHD sample demonstrated poorer performance (i.e., they had higher scores on the Conners CATA)
- ADHD sample had lower d′ scores, indicating that they had more difficulty in distinguishing between target trials and non-target trials than did the general population sample.
- ADHD sample made a greater number of errors (i.e., they had higher percentages Commissions and Perseverative Commissions than did the general population sample) and showed more variability in their responses (i.e., higher HRT SD scores, when compared to the matched general population sample)
- Validity also established by showing how it works together with other measures of similar constructs in the assessment of attention problems
- A sample of 112 youth, parent-reports on the Conners 3rd Edition (Conners 3-P) were collected in addition to their scores on the Conners CATA and the Conners CPT 3. Logistic regressions were conducted in order to determine how well scales from the Conners CATA improve the diagnostic efficacy of the Conners 3-P and Conners CPT 3 in predicting group membership into ADHD or general population groups
- Conners 3-P, Conners CPT 3, and Conners CATA scores were considered together, there was an overall correct classification rate (i.e., the ability to accurately predict group membership) of 93.8%, sensitivity (i.e., the ability to correctly detect ADHD cases) of 94.7%, and specificity (i.e., the ability to correctly detect general population cases) of 92.7%
- These values were 9.9%, 8.7%, and 10.9%, respectively, higher than when the rating scale was used on its own. Furthermore, the Conners CATA added increased classification accuracy over and above the Conners 3-P and Conners CPT 3
| |
