ADD and motor control - any link?

I was reading yesterday a chapter of a book online (by a Dr... I can't remember the name unfortunately) and he mentioned that most of his ADD patients have fine motor problems. Then today I was reading (in the sticky at the top of this board on biology) how ADD has a link to at least one part of the brain (pre motor cortex) involved in movement having a large reduction in glucose metabolism.

So then... is it true that ADD can cause real fine motor problems?

For me fine motor problems are a total plague, and it would seem, they're worse unmedicated - though I've never really thought to compare the two. Has anybody else seen this? I have found my handwriting to improve when on medication but I thought it was only a side-effect of paying close attention to it.

But for me good fine motor has always been out of reach. I shake, most notably. I'm wondering if this has some sort of link to ADD - if the neurological conditions for ADD cause fine motor problems as well.

I don't think the ADD itself causes motor problems. Depth perception is an issue with ADD, so often we appear clumsy...


It may be more common for ADDers to have fine motor skill issues outside of the standard perception issues that are seen very commonly.

I didn't mean to imply that ADD *causes* motor problems. I'm wondering if it's often coincident with them, though.

Rather I was suggesting that if the underlying neurological cause of ADD is, say, a dopamine problem, this could cause motor symptoms. A little more research has shown that dopamine problems *do* cause motor problems - Parkinson's disease, for instance.

What are the "standard preception issues", btw?

People with fine motor skills can exhibit adhd-LIKE traits, as can people with LD, sensory issues and central processing disorder

I didn't mean to imply that ADD *causes* motor problems. I'm wondering if it's often coincident with them, though.

Rather I was suggesting that if the underlying neurological cause of ADD is, say, a dopamine problem, this could cause motor symptoms. A little more research has shown that dopamine problems *do* cause motor problems - Parkinson's disease, for instance.

What are the "standard preception issues", btw?Perception with time, distance, size and speed...

It may be common for these things to be more common in people with ADD. I have bad "fine motor skills" in the first couple of tries with anything but develop them after a while. What you are talking about is fine motor skills even after picking up a skill, right?

I haven't noticed particular preception problems, myself. I'm horrible at motor-coordination, but that's another thing. I mean, me and any sort of ball-hitting sport (tennis, baseball, golf, etc.) is a recipe for disaster, and always has been.

Anyway yeah I was speaking more of problems that won't go away with practice. Like handwriting. No matter how much time I spent practicing my handwriting, it always comes out looking sloppy and childlike.

Or the most simple test for me - holding something steady. Can't do it, never have been able to. Ask me to draw a straight line and you'd think I was drawing in EKG. Long, steady, smooth motions are often beyond me. I'm passable with fast, sharp movements - like typing or playing video games. But ask me to do something smoothly, be it dancing or drawing a long line, it just won't happen. Controlling the strength of the response is similarly very challenging for me. In Video games, it's observed as pressing buttons so hard my whole arms are shaking. In tennis, in the event I do manage to hit a ball, the result is usually a home run. Not exactly what you're looking for in tennis.

I shake doing virtually any activity, especially those where a little tremble is expected, for me, it's much worse. Shooting sports, for instance, find me shaking horribly (and ruining accuracy), to the point where people I'm with start seriously wondering what is wrong with me.

Practice can certainly help, but I feel like I have a lot more problems than other people and it takes me much longer to gain similar proficiency to others, in the event that I can.

jimboOmega I'll play tennis with you our game sounds the same. :D
Seriously though I understand what you are talking about.
My motor skills are a lot like what you just described in yourself.
I can't draw a straight line with a ruler and my hand writing never improves.
Holding something steady can be very difficult at times.
I can't walk with a plate of food and not tip something off it.
I always wonder am I just clumsy or is it my AD/HD adding to me being clumsy.

I think ADD causes fine motor problems becuase ADD people as far as I knowhave a tendancy towards bad hand wirting. I myself have trrible handwriting, it is like dicifering acient code or something. ( maybe I could be code writer for the army or something).

I haven't noticed particular preception problems, myself. I'm horrible at motor-coordination, but that's another thing. I mean, me and any sort of ball-hitting sport (tennis, baseball, golf, etc.) is a recipe for disaster, and always has been.

Anyway yeah I was speaking more of problems that won't go away with practice. Like handwriting. No matter how much time I spent practicing my handwriting, it always comes out looking sloppy and childlike.

Actually, those are what I mean by perception problems. It is not so much that you do not have the motor skills but "external points of reference" are tricky.

If you geeked out on tennis, you would lose those problems and end up doing quite well. The contextual mind can be slow on the uptake but brilliant once it figures out how to store things. (Magic Johnson and Micheal Jordan are ADDers ;-) )

My handwriting is awful and I cannot draw a straight line. My pal Erin has beautiful handwriting and can draw quite well. Those were points of focus for her.

---------below here is theory----------

The vast majority of ADDers are contextual mind people. Having a purely contextual mind forces something I call internal reference. All references to size, speed, time and form need to be in context for us to understand and process them.

Most people have a system that goes along with the contextual mind that I call hierarchical mind. It has the purpose of storing and processing external points of reference. We do not have this...it is "grown" during the first years of childhood past the first stage of Piaget (the Sensorimotor Stage)

This stage continues throughout adulthood in ADD with greater and greater intelligence. Most children go through the other 3 stages.

Now... we do go through something akin to the other three stages but it happens differently. The HM structure does not exist so we pile *what is expected of us* into our contextual subsystem. This is a poor copy of what other people have. Basically the last three stages in Piaget are all about building external points of reference. We ADDers never build this in a way that is innately processed.

We cannot store external points of reference. All reference is internal. External reference can only be accomplished through side by side comparison (ie. context)

This affects culture becuase culture, by its very nature, must consist of point of external reference.

The cool thing is: Most brain processing time is spent on processing externally referent points. Since we don't do this... we get lots of extra "CPU cycles" to "play with". We get even more once we discard our externally referent illusions... easy for us ADDers to do because they are not naturally occuring in us.

----------------End theory talk---------------

Interestingly enough, it seems that most (yeah, like 2 or 3 out of 4, as if that's a good sample) of you have or have seen similar motor problems in yourselves. If I were a research scientist I'd do a more thorough study, and I'm loathe to make firm conclusions without doing so. But the more I look into the way I am and the more I read about ADD symptoms and Dopamine and all that, the more it seems likely that ADD is a dopamine problem.

You should probably read wikipedia's description of dopamine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dopamine). When you look at the things dopamine does, you'll probably realize you have problems with all of them. I did, and so I floated it as possible the rest of us might, in the context of a non-traditional symptom (motor control) and it seems I might be right. It is also possible that for some, the lack of attention is a local dopamine problem, and that would mean some would remain unaffected.

chain , I don't really agree with your points of reference thing. It's an intersting theory, but it's a lilttle too vague to be verifiable (and thus be scienece). What exactly would be symptoms fitting in to your framework? It almost sounds like you're talking about what a Jungian would call introversion. But I'm loathe to accept things that are based on "stages" of development. They're a dime a dozen ever since Frued came up with his sexual stages, and they usually lack any kind of biological or scientific basis beyond someone's personal observations.

Plus, somewhat paradoxically, it seems like you're saying "You can improve if you put your mind to it", but that is the one thing we ADDers can't do. (I'm laughing as I say this. It's just funny to imagine a coach telling a room of ADDers "Come on guys, you can do this if you focus!")

I do think there might be a tendency for ADD people to be introverted. I'm introverted, that's for sure. I don't know, though, if this is a result of the general world not providing enough stimulation/interest to the ADDer. It's possible that the ADD mind can't properly find interest in the outside world, turning more of their energy inward - daydreaming, zoning out, and so on.

Or the tendency to introversion might just be because the ADD causes the outside world to be a source of negative feedback - people calling you lazy, off task, etc - and so you tune that out and instead focus inward.

In any event, motor problems are more straightforward. Big dopamine errors in the right parts of the brain definitely do cause motor problems, this underlies Parkinson's disease as noted. The biggest result of parkinson's is tremors. I've got tremors, certainly (and always have). My girlfriend has noted that I tend to have sharp, twitchy movements even when I'm sleeping. (Though my dancing bothers her more).

Chain,

You make some interesting points about ADD and "contextual processing", but I'm afraid you are trying to stuff a very complex syndrome into an overly simplistic model. With all due respect for Piaget, his theory (which was based solely on anecdotal observation of his 3 children) has been supplanted with much more sophisticated and empirically based models of child development.

Based on your assertion that ADD impedes development of "hierarchical processing", you seem to be saying that people with ADD cannot form abstract mental representations -- "perceptual constants" -- but depend instead on multiple egocentrically based representations to build up an internal model of the world. If this were true, it would result in serious intellectual deficits...most notably a remarkably limited capacity for abstract thought. But the fact is...we ADDers do develop non-contextual representations -- e.g. of North, South, East and West -- that are independent of our own, personal, location in space.

That said, I think you are onto something very important regarding ADD and reliance on context for structure. But let's not squeeze our brains into theories that don't fit them...let's develop new ones (theories, that is...not brains!)

Chain,

You make some interesting points about ADD and "contextual processing", but I'm afraid you are trying to stuff a very complex syndrome into an overly simplistic model. With all due respect for Piaget, his theory (which was based solely on anecdotal observation of his 3 children) has been supplanted with much more sophisticated and empirically based models of child development.

Based on your assertion that ADD impedes development of "hierarchical processing", you seem to be saying that people with ADD cannot form abstract mental representations -- "perceptual constants" -- but depend instead on multiple egocentrically based representations to build up an internal model of the world. If this were true, it would result in serious intellectual deficits...most notably a remarkably limited capacity for abstract thought. But the fact is...we ADDers do develop non-contextual representations -- e.g. of North, South, East and West -- that are independent of our own, personal, location in space.

That said, I think you are onto something very important regarding ADD and reliance on context for structure. But let's not squeeze our brains into theories that don't fit them...let's develop new ones (theories, that is...not brains!)
Yay! thanks for the rebuttal!

Actually I have a very simple model and it shows that ADDers CAN *process* abstract concepts... we just *store* them differently and in a less efficient way. We *understand* concepts like North, South, East and West (Actually very few people have full spatial processing of these directions...some do, it is rare or dependant on context).

For me West is "the sun setting on the ocean" (yes I do see that, it is not abstract), North is a "snow covered pine tree", South is "a humid jungle" and east is "a city with skyscrapers and pigeons". That is what I mean by context. I see those images and have since I was a little boy... if you say west...it may lead me to the ocean. I store "abstract" reality in contexts.

It could just be me... but I know other ADDers that do this AND most non-ADD people I talk to don't think of the non-abstract concept primarily... language does hold abstracted externally referent info... but that is not where most people seem to store that stuff :)

You say:

"that ADD impedes development of "hierarchical processing", you seem to be saying that people with ADD cannot form abstract mental representations -- "perceptual constants" -- but depend instead on multiple egocentrically based representations to build up an internal model of the world. If this were true, it would result in serious intellectual deficits...most notably a remarkably limited capacity for abstract thought. But the fact is...we ADDers do develop non-contextual representations -- "

Here I am not saying ADD impedes anything. Just like I am not saying that not having ADD impedes anything....They are two distinct functional cognitive types* (I put my theory of functional typology below). Functional types are functional...ADD is not ego centric but context centric with the individual as the central context by which all other things are measured. External Reference is created and stored but it done so differently and secondarily... (to tell you the truth... the only real problem that having a contextual mind creates is that it is a minority cognition) There is truly no such thing as "non-contextual" representation... at all. Everything has context... it is just how that context is processed.

1. externally simplified and iconic (like culture)2. internally complex, sense based and non-abstracted.

I am not talking about abstract knowledge here at all. In fact ADDers seem to swim in abstract knowledge. I am talking about abstracted points of reference that are processed at the sub-aware level in most people and are processed at the near aware or fully aware level in most ADDers. This somewhat maps to "object abstraction" but on the below awareness level. There is a "hierarchical storage system" that most people have that we do not as ADDers. It is all about the sub-aware storage and processing of "iconic representations" that form "external reference points" in order to allow human beings form culture.

The clearest "external point of reference" that I can show is the concept of linear time. Time is almost purely contextual for ADDers. It is painfully so, in fact. Culture is filled with these external reference points.

Now... can ADDers process linear time? Of course we can... can we do it on a sub-aware level? Most of the time, no. Can most people do this on a sub aware level? Yes, most of the time they can...

This maps to tardiness in ADDers. It seems like "lack of focus" but is really incomplete processing of abstract linear time and the prioritization of that time.

Prioritization is another "external reference point"... There is individual prioritization and social prioritization. Most people can combine these on a sub aware level (some non-ADDers cannot, but most can). ADDers have a very hard time of this. When you combine lack of social prioritization and lack of linear time... you have some pretty big problems.

Can ADDers overcome that quandary, Yes, absolutely! This is because the contextual cognition is the "base cognition" It is very flexible and extremely powerful. Every sentient being has contextual mind. A sub-group of humans have developed "hierarchical mind" in order to synchronize world views

I completely agree with your view on Piaget... he did make some valid observations and formed the base on which many developmental theories operate from today (either in opposition or addition to). I just use him as an example since he is such a common point of reference. I do say that we have things akin to Piaget's phases... but different than most non-ADDers.

I do take issue with the "complex syndrome in an overly simplistic model" argument... yes there is lots of variability in the ADD population and the non ADD population.

Models and theories should be simple but with built in understanding that dynamic systems are chaotic. (Biology and cognition are dynamic systems). Every prediction I have in my model is prefaced (or should be) with "There is a higher potentiality that..."


complex models mean that they are describing things out of context. I find that troublesome.



!!!Warning Boring Long Theory and Model not Meant for Human Consumption!!!!! (but I had to write it anyway.... sigh, dang hyperfocus)

Here is a very brief view into my model and theory:

Part 1 Evolutionary model of the contextual mind.
Chaos is the "non-sentient" structure of the universe. This structure has forms that repeat from galaxies to nautilus shells. This structure forms in dynamical systems.

Forms that settle to a "near predictable state" are called attractors.

Attractors: A certain kind of attractor forms when two or more dynamical system effect each other then settle to a more predictable state.

Primary Theory/Presumption: Chaotic attractors map to functional types in biology.
Function is simply a successful attractor that is part of a dynamic system (a context).

Hence my scientific philosophy is called functional typology (this is from linguistics: "functional and typological grammar")

A time slice of dynamic systems reveals a gradient of predictable and less predictable structures.

Biology is highly ordered. "Nature forces solutions that are highly form dependant and distinguishable". There is a gradient from "highly functional" to "less functional".

All forms are either functional types or transitional types (moving to or from a type that was functional in a previous context)

Main Presumption of "Functional Typology": Natural structure of the universe maps to biology (a subset of order in the universe). Biology is a highly ordered but dynamical system that has functional types and transition types.

Axioms. These consist of 3 elements. Environments that contain Systems made up of Functional Types. This is recursive.

Axiom 1: Functional types exist at all levels and in all types of biological structure.(from molecular to multi-special)
Axiom 2: All functional types exist in systems with other functional types.
Level 1 Single functional type with 1 or more members.
Level 2 Single functional type with multiple members that interact.
Level 3 Systems are symbiotic relationships between two individual functional types
Level 4 Systems involve feedback systems with many functional types and transitional types

Axiom 3: All contextual environments are dynamic to varying degrees.
Axiom 4: The more dynamic a contextual environment is, the greater the number of transition types and the fewer the number of functional types.
Axiom 5: How dynamic an environmental context is, is relative to the stability of a functional system
Axiom 6: A stable system is more functional than an unstable one.
Axiom 7: Functional systems form more functional types to deal with a dynamic environmental context.
Axiom 8: Recursion increases as systems evolve.
The evolution of culture and technology.

1. Pre-Human groups that pooled resource were more functional (functional patterns are more stable and longer lasting)

2. Humans that formed groups (systems) that were more organized were more functional in a dynamic environment

3. Simple Social organization demanded "Contextual external reference" points that small groups use to share world view.

4. More Complex social organization demanded "Abstracted external reference" points (Roles) that helped build social hierarchy.

5. Highly complex social organization demanded "Communication of Abstracted external reference points" (Standards) in the form of language.

6. Language allowed humans to build culture through "cross generational" structure.

7. Culture is born in a highly dynamic environmental context.

8. Adrenaline based survival focus (hyperfocus) switches to longer less stress dependant cultural focus.
9. Individual humans start switching emphasis from processing a natural environmental context to processing an abstract cultural context.

10. As culture gets more complex, it demands more mental processing from the individuals. Processing "abstracted external reference points" is much more intensive than survival processing. Brain complexity is increasing.

11. As processing moves away from processing a natural environmental context, the groups are left more open to predation because there senses are not as accute.

12. Individuals are born with lower ability to process "abstracted external reference points" but a higher ability to "process a natural environmental context". They have more

13. These individuals become a functional type following Axiom 7. (Re-introduction of contextual base cognition, with internal reference)

14. These individuals have the same complex brain that is used to process culture but are extra-cultural.

15. Base cognition comes with hyperfocus. During times when the group is safe. Hyperfocus combined with extra processing power are used to create.

16. Contextual processing and impulsivity leads to new survival skills needed for migration. New technologies and belief systems are developed during periods of boredom.

17. The cultural cognitive functional type and the creative/protective cultural subtype form a symbiosis

18. More technology and more complex belief systems lead to more complex culture which requires more complex brain structure for the majority cognitive type.

19. Agriculture causes communities to grow. The contextual cognitive type is less needed and disruptive to the social order.

20. Large cities form. Educational systems are created to bring more stability to the culture.

21. The contextual cognitive type still generates useful technology but causes even more disruption.

22. Humanity starts to study the mind.

23. Psychology views minority cognitive functional types and transition types as disordered based on disruptive behaviors in relation to the culture.

Axiom 1: indicates that there should be functional types in a human society. Even without knowing about the presence of ADD and Aspergers, it would make sense for there to be cultural processors "Paradigm maintainers" to keep the ship afloat and a smaller number of extra cultural "paradigm shifters" in order to steer the ship in times where the environment is dynamic. Technology is a result of the symbiosis.

All that being said... we are still in a dynamic system. The attractors are only points at which the cognitive functional types center around. There are most likely functional and transition subtypes within the base types. Also ADD and Aspergers are probably not the only way to create this valuable internally referent cognitive type. I am sure the majority cognitive type would join us if they thought it looked like a good time, lol.

Ok that was really long :) I am sure nobody will read it but I sure enjoyed writing it :)

Sorry for violating the rules of brevity! Of course nobody is forced to read this ;-)

Interestingly enough, it seems that most (yeah, like 2 or 3 out of 4, as if that's a good sample) of you have or have seen similar motor problems in yourselves. If I were a research scientist I'd do a more thorough study, and I'm loathe to make firm conclusions without doing so. But the more I look into the way I am and the more I read about ADD symptoms and Dopamine and all that, the more it seems likely that ADD is a dopamine problem.
I am arguing that not all things must be a problem... it is a difference that causes problems. It also has its own disorders.

You should probably read wikipedia's description of dopamine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dopamine). When you look at the things dopamine does, you'll probably realize you have problems with all of them. I did, and so I floated it as possible the rest of us might, in the context of a non-traditional symptom (motor control) and it seems I might be right. It is also possible that for some, the lack of attention is a local dopamine problem, and that would mean some would remain unaffected.
There are also actual structure differences in the brain that go with it... Here is the problem: How do we know that it is a disorder...it is it just because we are on a different end of the baseline? Very few people have stopped to ask the question "are their possibly different functional cognitive types?" If there are, then we are a hidden minority cognitive type...that has trouble with culture. Double whammy of difficulties! How much of what causes us anxiety is due to what other people think about us...how much of it is due to use not "fitting in"?

chain , I don't really agree with your points of reference thing. It's an intersting theory, but it's a lilttle too vague to be verifiable (and thus be scienece). What exactly would be symptoms fitting in to your framework? It almost sounds like you're talking about what a Jungian would call introversion. But I'm loathe to accept things that are based on "stages" of development. They're a dime a dozen ever since Frued came up with his sexual stages, and they usually lack any kind of biological or scientific basis beyond someone's personal observations.

Plus, somewhat paradoxically, it seems like you're saying "You can improve if you put your mind to it", but that is the one thing we ADDers can't do. (I'm laughing as I say this. It's just funny to imagine a coach telling a room of ADDers "Come on guys, you can do this if you focus!")).
No this is not anything to do with introversion. It is simply the effects of having a contextual processing system. It is a tad bit tricky to prove, in a way, because we do have a poor copy of what most people have for storing external points of reference (out of context). We do not process culture well. This is a big hint... It is very common for there to be incomplete mapping of gender roles in ADD which is constantly re-enforced in our society. It is more noticable in women.

Culture is external abstract points of reference that are used to synchronize world view.

The stages of development do happen...it is not the same for every person and very different for ADDers... Read through all of the more detailed models of development and really think about it. You will really start questioning many of the phases you were supposed to go through.

With ADD, we are HIGHLY externally and internally observant. So in a sense, we are conected into observable contextual reality instead of abstracted iconic reality (external points of reference). We share a common reality of coffee cup on the table but we may not understand cultural cues.

The coach that says "hey guys, we can do it" probably would not be listened to by an internally referent ADDer...that is because he is creating a shared reality with the team that many ADDers would have a hard time accepting...

I am simply telling you that with ADD "mind over matter" is a real possibility. It is with people who are not ADD but we have what I call "cognitive clay".

You know you can change attitudes very fast! Most people cannot...it is because you really did build your internal structure. It was not built for you.
We are forced to question...we have no choice..That is internal reference.






I do think there might be a tendency for ADD people to be introverted. I'm introverted, that's for sure. I don't know, though, if this is a result of the general world not providing enough stimulation/interest to the ADDer. It's possible that the ADD mind can't properly find interest in the outside world, turning more of their energy inward - daydreaming, zoning out, and so on.

Or the tendency to introversion might just be because the ADD causes the outside world to be a source of negative feedback - people calling you lazy, off task, etc - and so you tune that out and instead focus inward.

In any event, motor problems are more straightforward. Big dopamine errors in the right parts of the brain definitely do cause motor problems, this underlies Parkinson's disease as noted. The biggest result of parkinson's is tremors. I've got tremors, certainly (and always have). My girlfriend has noted that I tend to have sharp, twitchy movements even when I'm sleeping. (Though my dancing bothers her more).
Again it is not introversion that I am talking about but internal reference.

I have built out the model and the predictions. It is just a matter of editing it.

Above you will see my scientific theory that is called "functional typology" it explains the why of add in evolutionary and social terms.

Finally... this is not science...yet and may never be. It is a model that I feel is generally accurate and will open up some new thinking on the subject (it REALLY needs that). My model will either be verified to a degree...or will be trashed by hard studies... But it is one of the first fully predictive models of a functional cognitive type. So I won't shed to many tears if it gets torched.

Most of the problem at this point is communication. Verbally, people see it quickly. It is a bit harder on paper. Just adding to the mix :)

Thanks for your response! I need the feedback

... I have bad "fine motor skills" in the first couple of tries with anything but develop them after a while.

i had some questions for you regarding this statement which i've taken them to another thread. http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=178278#post178278

i'd be interested in your thoughts if/when you've got time.

thanks :)

w.