The attributions of children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder for their problem behaviors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the attributions children with ADHD make about their most problematic symptoms. Children were interviewed to determine the degree to which they felt their behavior was controllable, stable, global, and stigmatizing; and about the locus of the cause of their behavior. Participants were 16 children with ADHD (10 boys, 6 girls), and 16 children without ADHD (9 boys, 7 girls), ages 7 to 13. The present study demonstrated that children with ADHD viewed their most problematic behaviors as less within their control and more global across situations than children without ADHD. Children with ADHD were more likely than children without ADHD to view their most problematic behavior as always having been present, but were no more likely to view their most problematic behavior as persisting into the future. No significant group differences emerged on the locus of causality dimension. With regards to stigmatization, girls without ADHD reported that their behaviors can bother their teachers, parents, and peers, whereas girls and boys with ADHD did not perceive their behavior as bothersome.
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 | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".