Collateral Effects of a Peer Relationship Intervention for Children With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder on Typically Developing Classmates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
.General education teachers often implement classroom practices to address the needs of selected children with clinically significant behavior problems. The extent to which such practices affect the classmates of the selected children is an important question. Making Socially Accepting Inclusive Classrooms (MOSAIC) is a teacher-delivered classroom intervention, designed for and validated to improve the peer relationships of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The current study examined the collateral effects of MOSAIC on 113 typically developing (TD) classmates (ages 6.8–9.8, 47% boys) of the children with ADHD; TD children did not meet criteria for any clinical disorder. All children were enrolled in a summer program containing 16 classrooms with teachers randomly assigned to MOSAIC or to an active comparison intervention condition. Results indicated that TD children showed reduced negative sociometric nominations from peers, increased reciprocated friendships, and reduced negative interactions with peers in MOSAIC. The positive effects of MOSAIC were accentuated for TD children with higher levels of disruptive behavior. In sum, the benefits of a peer relationship intervention targeted for children with ADHD may extend to TD classmates.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".