Interrupting During Arguments in ADHD: Quick Reactions and Repair

The person in front of me begins a sentence. In the first half of it I think I have understood what they will say. Without waiting for the second half, I answer.

"Will you let me finish?"

And the subject of the argument suddenly changes. What were we just talking about no longer matters. Now the subject is that I am not listening to them.

Sometimes a person notices that the reason they lost the argument was not what they said but when they said it.

Where this article fits

I described the general mechanisms of interrupting in the article on why people with ADHD talk so much, and all the faces of impulsivity in the article on impulsivity in ADHD. Here I want to look at a narrower and, I think, more painful moment: interrupting not in a calm chat but in a conversation where two people have become tense.

Because interrupting in a calm chat looks a bit like rudeness. In an argument, a different message reaches the other person: "What you think is not important to me."

Why the brake is late

Russell Barkley's model of ADHD puts behavioral inhibition at its center: being able to hold a response before it begins, being able to stop a response that has begun, and, in the meantime, resisting distracting things. According to Barkley, when this inhibition capacity is weakened, the other executive functions built on it falter too (Barkley, 1997).

The model as a whole is still debated. But there is a measured finding that inhibition is strained in ADHD. In the "stop signal" task widely used in laboratories, a person is getting ready to press a key when a signal appears on the screen and they have to stop the movement. A meta-analysis that brought these tasks together found that the time needed to stop is significantly longer than in controls, in both children and adults with ADHD (Lijffijt et al., 2005).

Stopping a key press is of course not the same as stopping a sentence. But the experience is very similar. The answer has already set off. By the time you hit the brake, the car is already in the middle of the intersection.

In the glossary this is called response inhibition.

An argument weakens the brake even more

In a calm moment I can perhaps wait for the end of the sentence. In an argument I cannot. I think there are three reasons.

The first is the speed of emotion. Difficulty with emotion regulation is common in ADHD, and a rising emotion uses up the already limited capacity of the inhibition system. Its counterpart in the glossary is emotional flooding.

The second is fear of losing it. In an argument, the answer that comes to mind feels very important, and my working memory knows it will not be able to hold it. As the other person keeps talking, my answer will be erased. So that it will not be erased, I step in.

The third is prediction. If I know the person I am arguing with well, I think I know where their sentence is going. And most of the time I more or less do. But what matters in arguments is precisely the small difference at the end of that sentence. A sentence that begins "You were late" and ends "and you didn't call me" does not say the same thing as one that ends "and so I got worried." When I answer on prediction, I have answered a sentence the other person never built.

Interrupting is sometimes not done to silence the other person; it is a move made so as not to lose my own thought. But the other person cannot know that.

What has been seen in couples

An observational study with young adult couples is very illuminating here. The researchers compared, in a conflict-resolution task, couples in which one partner had combined-type ADHD, couples in which one had inattentive-type ADHD, and couples without an ADHD diagnosis. In the couples with combined-type ADHD, more negativity and less positivity were seen during the conversation, and this lined up with the couples' relationship satisfaction. The behavior of couples with inattentive-type ADHD, on the other hand, largely resembled that of the undiagnosed couples (Canu et al., 2014).

I think this difference matters. In the combined type, alongside inattention there are also impulsivity and hyperactivity. So part of what makes conflict harder may be less drifting off than the quick reaction that is the subject of this article.

Let me add this too: the study was done with young adult couples and a limited sample. It does not say that every person with ADHD behaves this way in an argument. But it points to an area of risk.

Something more important than preventing negativity

John Gottman and colleagues, among the best-known names in couples research, followed 130 newlywed couples for six years and tested seven different interaction patterns in conflict conversations. With these patterns, separation or staying together could be predicted with 83 percent accuracy and marital satisfaction with 80 percent. One of the elements that predicted satisfaction was positive emotion that could be preserved even inside the conflict. Another striking observation of the study was that the "active listening" pattern often taught in therapy, reflecting back what you hear, was very rarely seen in real conflict conversations (Gottman et al., 1998).

When I first read this finding I felt relieved.

Because I do not think I can stop interrupting altogether. My inhibition system will not suddenly start working flawlessly in an argument. But keeping warmth inside the argument, noticing a mistake and repairing it immediately, being able to smile for a moment: these feel more within reach to me. Knowing that I do not have to produce textbook sentences in an argument is also a relief in itself.

Repair: giving back the interrupted word

These are the things that are meaningful to me, the things I find worth trying.

Give it back the moment you notice. The moment you notice you have interrupted, leave your sentence half finished and say "Sorry, I interrupted you, go on." This short sentence often does what a long apology cannot. The other person sees that you noticed and that you care about their words.

Set your thought down on paper. In a conversation you know will turn into an argument, take a piece of paper or an open note on your phone. When an answer comes to mind, write it in one word. That way the fear of losing your answer lessens and you can wait. It may look strange at first; explaining it beforehand helps: "I'm taking notes because I don't want to interrupt you."

Make the speaking turn visible. In very tense conversations, using an object held by whoever's turn it is may look childish. But for someone with ADHD a sign visible from outside carries, for a while, the brake that is not working inside.

Begin by stating the other person's last sentence. When the turn passes to you, briefly repeat what the other person said last, before your own answer. This both shows you were listening and creates a one-second pause.

A break when emotion peaks. When you feel you can no longer hold anything, continuing the conversation is usually the worst thing. Saying "I'm very full right now, let's continue in twenty minutes" is time given for the brake to start working again. What matters is coming back. For moments when anger is rising, the early signs in the article on anger outbursts are useful here too.

Agree in a calm moment. Setting rules during an argument does not work. In a calm moment try saying this: "If I interrupt you during an argument, you can raise your hand, and I will stop right away and ask you to continue." A sign agreed beforehand does not turn into a new fight in the moment.

All of these methods are things set up in calm moments. In the middle of an argument you may not remember any of them. So it is more realistic to turn at least one of them, the simplest, into a habit. For most people this is saying "sorry, go on" the moment they notice they have interrupted. A single sentence, short enough to memorize.

For the person being interrupted

Having your words cut off makes a person feel small, and it is your right to say so. Saying "I want to finish right now" instead of "you're always like this" gets results faster, because it speaks about the moment, not about character.

There is something else I find worth trying: if you are going to say something important, announce it at the start. A sentence like "This will take me a little while, I want you to listen to the end" gives the inhibition system of a partner with ADHD a warning beforehand. Putting the main sentence up front instead of hiding it at the end of a long introduction also works, because attention holds best at the beginning.

Let me add this too: explaining interrupting through a mechanism does not make it your problem. The other person's responsibility to repair it continues.

What stays with me

For a long time I promised myself "next time I won't interrupt." Each time I thought I had kept it, and each time I could not. Then I felt ashamed.

Now I make a different promise: I will interrupt, but I will give the word back the moment I notice.

This promise is less ambitious. But it can be kept.

There is one more good thing about repair: it can be done again every time. A flawless argument, once missed, does not come back. But an interrupted word can be given back a sentence later.