Peer victimization in children with Attention‐Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study explored peer victimization in 9‐ to 14‐year‐old children with and without Attention‐Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The sample comprised 104 children, 52 of whom had a previous ADHD diagnosis. Children with ADHD had higher overall rates of self‐reported victimization by peers and parent‐ and teacher‐reported bullying behavior than did children without ADHD. The rates of victimization were especially high for girls with ADHD. Furthermore, children with ADHD reported higher frequencies of verbal, physical, and relational victimization than did children without ADHD. When data were pooled from children, parents, and teachers, children with ADHD were categorized as victims, bullies, and bully/victims significantly more often than were children without ADHD. Parent ratings of ADHD symptoms predicted self‐reported victimization by peers. Neither parent‐rated anxious‐shy behaviors nor parent‐ and teacher‐rated social skills predicted victimization by peers over and above ADHD symptoms. Parent ratings of oppositional behavior mediated the relationship between ADHD symptoms and parent‐ and teacher‐rated bullying. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it