MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008503427 · doi:10.1177/0022219408326096

Learning Disabilities and Risk-Taking Behavior in Adolescents

2008· article· en· W2008503427 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Learning Disabilities · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyLearning disabilityDevelopmental psychologyLearning disorders

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Risk-taking behavior includes alcohol and drug use, delinquency, acts of aggression, sexual activity, and so on. Many studies have explored the relationship between adolescents and risk-taking behavior; however, only a few studies have examined this link in adolescents with learning disabilities (LD) or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The purpose of the present study was to address that limitation by comparing the risk-taking behavior of adolescents with LD (n=230), with comorbid LD/ADHD (n=92), and without LD or ADHD (n=322) on their substance use, engagement in major and minor delinquency, acts of aggression, sexual activity, and gambling activities. The study also investigated whether psychosocial variables (e.g., well-being) may act as mediating variables that help explain between-group differences. Results suggest that it is a combination of the LD and the secondary psychosocial characteristics that explains why adolescents with LD and comorbid LD/ADHD more frequently engage in some risk-taking behavior.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.693

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it