Enter your email address
Submit
Write your message
Volume 24, Issue 150 (8-2025)
Journal of Psychological Science 2025, 24(150): 107-126 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
ahmadabadi F, saif A, babakhani N. (2025). Comparison of the efficacy of computer cognitive rehabilitation training methods and concept map training on the attention, focus of ADD students. Journal of Psychological Science. 24(150), 107-126.
URL: http://psychologicalscience.ir/article-1-2540-en.html
URL: http://psychologicalscience.ir/article-1-2540-en.html
Professor, Department of Psychology, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Unit, Tehran, Iran , aliakbarsaif@yahoo.com
Abstract: (25 Views)
Background: Attention deficit is one of the most common disorders during childhood and adulthood, negatively affecting the academic performance and motivation of many students. Various interventions, such as computerized cognitive rehabilitation and concept mapping training, have been implemented in separate studies to improve attention and focus in these individuals. However, no study has yet compared the efficacy of computerized cognitive rehabilitation and concept mapping training in enhancing attention and focus.
Aims: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of computerized cognitive rehabilitation training and concept map training on the attention and concentration of students with attention deficit and concentration.
Methods: The research was applied in terms of purpose and quasi-experimental methodology in a series of pre-test-posttest designs with a control group. The statistical population of the study consisted of all female high school students in Tehran in the academic year 2020-2021. The sample consisted of 60 students with attention deficit problems who were selected by a multi-stage random sampling method and randomly assigned to two experimental and control groups. In the pre-test and post-test, students responded to an integrated survey of audio-visual performance (Sandford & Turner, 1994) and a researcher-made reading comprehension test appropriate to the pre-test and post-test.
Results: The results of univariate analysis of covariance showed that computerized cognitive rehabilitation training and concept map training were effective on the attention and concentration of students with attention deficits and concentration (P< 0.001). The results of Bonferroni’s post hoc tests showed that there was a significant difference between the effectiveness of the two interventions: computerized cognitive rehabilitation and concept map training.
Conclusion: The results showed that computerized cognitive rehabilitation training was effective on the attention and concentration of students with attention deficits and concentration, while concept map training was not effective on attention and concentration, and concept map training was effective on reading comprehension, while computerized cognitive rehabilitation was not effective on reading comprehension.
Aims: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of computerized cognitive rehabilitation training and concept map training on the attention and concentration of students with attention deficit and concentration.
Methods: The research was applied in terms of purpose and quasi-experimental methodology in a series of pre-test-posttest designs with a control group. The statistical population of the study consisted of all female high school students in Tehran in the academic year 2020-2021. The sample consisted of 60 students with attention deficit problems who were selected by a multi-stage random sampling method and randomly assigned to two experimental and control groups. In the pre-test and post-test, students responded to an integrated survey of audio-visual performance (Sandford & Turner, 1994) and a researcher-made reading comprehension test appropriate to the pre-test and post-test.
Results: The results of univariate analysis of covariance showed that computerized cognitive rehabilitation training and concept map training were effective on the attention and concentration of students with attention deficits and concentration (P< 0.001). The results of Bonferroni’s post hoc tests showed that there was a significant difference between the effectiveness of the two interventions: computerized cognitive rehabilitation and concept map training.
Conclusion: The results showed that computerized cognitive rehabilitation training was effective on the attention and concentration of students with attention deficits and concentration, while concept map training was not effective on attention and concentration, and concept map training was effective on reading comprehension, while computerized cognitive rehabilitation was not effective on reading comprehension.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License. |
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)