Boomsma et al 1 assessed the efficacy of electroencephalographic (EEG) neurofeedback in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder by comparing an experimental group (n = 22) receiving EEG neurofeedback to a placebo group (inactive neurofeedback) (n = 19). Results did not show significant differences between the 2 groups. The authors report that, post hoc, the "sample had 80% power to detect a treatment effect of 0.90" and that "it is unlikely that the negative results were due to limited statistical power," 1(p826) concluding that their study sheds serious doubt on the effectiveness of EEG neurofeedback as a way of treating children with attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder. First, we want to acknowledge the robust design and methodology of this study. However, we are not sure what the authors meant by stating in their discussion that "the sample had 80% power to detect a treatment effect of 0.90, " and we cannot find an explanation of the rationale behind such a statement. How would statistical power be an issue if the effect size was as high as 0.90 in a sample of 41 participants? We ran a post hoc power analysis, using G*Power Version 3.1.5, 2,3 for a sample size of 41 participants, α of 5% and an effect size of 0.90 resulting from repeated-measures analysis of variance within-group and between-groups interaction tests for 2 groups and 2 measuring times, and found that this sample would have achieved 100% power to detect a treatment effect size of 0.90, not 80% as reported by the authors. Therefore, there is a 100% chance of finding statistically significant differences (P ≤ .05) between the EEG neurofeedback group and the placebo group, 4 although none were found. Impossible, unless the effect size equaled zero. We suspect that the authors made a calculation error. To verify this, we first calculated η 2 effect size for all the comparisons in the group × time effect (interaction) using the

Le passage vers le secondaire est une étape importante dans la vie des adolescents. En effet, cette transition survient au moment où les jeunes adolescents doivent composer avec plusieurs changements physiques, émotifs et intellectuels. La transition vers le secondaire peut contribuer à l’émergence de troubles de santé mentale. Alors que les écrits scientifiques font état de plusieurs études sur le passage vers le secondaire, peu s’intéressent à la perception des élèves ayant un trouble du spectre de l’autisme (TSA) vivant le passage vers le secondaire. Cette étude vise à décrire la perception de 14 élèves ayant un TSA intégrés en classe ordinaire comparé à celle de 14 de leurs pairs quant à leurs craintes, leurs anticipations positives et les moyens pouvant faciliter le passage vers le secondaire. Pour ce faire, une entrevue semi-structurée a été réalisée auprès des participants. Par la suite, des tests de McNemar ont été utilisés pour comparer les réponses des deux groupes. Les résultats indiquent qu’il n’existe pas de différence significative quant aux craintes, aux anticipations positives et les moyens susceptibles d’être aidants lors du passage vers le secondaire chez les deux groupes. Ainsi, il est recommandé d’adopter une attitute normalisante auprès de cette clientèle.The transition to high school is an important milestone in the life of a teenager, which concurrently takes place with other physical, emotional and intellectual changes. The changes in this transitioning period potentially contribute to the emergence of mental health problems. While the literature includes many studies regarding students’ transition to high school, none has discussed this among students with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD). This study aims to describe the perception of 14 students with ASD who are integrated into an ordinary classroom in comparison to 14 of their peers regarding their fears, their positive expectations and the means that may potentially facilitate the transition to high school. To this end, McNemar tests were used to compare the responses of both groups. The results indicate that there is no significant difference between each group pertaining to their fears, positive expectations and elements that would be helpful. Thus, it is recommended to adopt a normative stand with this clientele

the therapeutic contribution of social sensitivity; nevertheless, the current results are promising and indicate the need for further examination of the model.

Tous droits réservés © Revue québécoise de psychologie, 2019Ce document est protégé par la loi sur le droit d'auteur. L'utilisation des services d'Érudit (y compris la reproduction) est assujettie à sa politique d'utilisation que vous pouvez consulter en ligne.