Sluggish Cognitive Tempo (Concentration Deficit Disorder?): Current Status, Future Directions, and a Plea to Change the Name Russell A. Barkley Published online: 15 November 2013 # Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013 Abstract Symptoms of sluggish cognitive tempo (SCT) have been recognized for nearly 30 years as comprising a semi- independent set(s) of symptoms from the inattentive (IN) and hyperactive-impulsive (HI) symptoms involved in attention- deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). It has only been with- in the past decade that research focusing specifically on SCT symptoms and on samples of SCT cases chosen independently from ADHD samples has increased so as to address the question of whether SCT is a distinct condition from ADHD or other disorders. All but two of these studies have focused on children but the two extant large scale studies on adults have replicated those findings. This Commentary highlights not only those findings concerning SCT that appear to be relatively robust, but also those patterns that appear to be emerging yet in need of further research to corroborate their association with SCT, as well as those barely or unexplored areas that may deserve more research. Evidence to date, including the many findings in this special issue, is nearing a critical mass that likely supports the conclusion that SCT is a distinct disorder of attention from ADHD, yet one that may overlap with it in about half of all cases. SCT has unique symptom dimensions and comorbidities from ADHD, proba- bly distinct though lesser domains of impairment and demo- graphic correlates, and perhaps unique cognitive deficits, causes and life course risks. These latter areas, however, are in need of substantially more research as is SCT in adults and treatments specifically designed for cases of SCT. Meanwhile, the name of the condition is premature, implying a known cognitive deficit that is as yet unknown, and is proving de- rogatory and offensive to patients, leading this author to recommend a change to Concentration Deficit Disorder. Keywords Sluggish cognitive tempo (SCT) . Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) . Symptom dimensions . Comorbidity . Impairment . Etiology It is both a privilege and a pleasure to be invited by the Editors of the Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology to summarize the current status and future directions of research on sluggish cognitive tempo (SCT) in view of the results of the excellent collection of research papers on this topic contained in this special section. While space precludes a lengthy discussion of all of the current findings and potential future directions related to this topic, this paper will focus on those issues which the author believes are most important at this time. Although the first description of an attention disorder similar to SCT may have been in the medical textbook by Alexander Crichton (1798), probably the first person to coin the term for a distinct factor of inattention from that seen in ADHD was a graduate student of Caryn Carlson’ s named R. Neeper (Carlson 1986). Since its inception, the term SCT remains a highly under- studied construct and associated pattern of symptoms (and disorder) within the field of clinical psychology and psychia- try—a situation which this special issue was developed to partially address. More than 10,000 articles exist (and more than 4,000 of those have been published just since 2007) on the other attention disorder currently known as attention- deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Yet fewer than 50 exist on SCT. This circumstance clearly warrants that sub- stantially more research be directed at all aspects of SCT (vs. ADHD and related disorders as well as typical people) including demographics, correlates, comorbidity, families, and especially etiologies, interventions, and life course risks. R. A. Barkley Departments of Psychiatry and Pediatrics, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA R. A. Barkley (*) 1752 Greenspoint Ct., Mt. Pleasant, SC 29466, USA e-mail: drbarkley@russellbarkley.org J Abnorm Child Psychol (2014) 42:117–125 DOI 10.1007/s10802-013-9824-y