Self-Reported Inattention in Early Adolescence in a Community Sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Inattention is typically associated with ADHD, but less research has been done to examine the correlates of self-reported inattention in youth in a community sample. METHOD: Associations among self-reported inattention, parent-reported inattention, and self-reported psychopathology in children aged 10 to 11 years are examined. Self-reported inattention is also examined as a predictor of outcomes in peer relationships and victimization at ages 10 and 11 and in peer relationships at ages 14 and 15. RESULTS: Children's self-reports of inattention correlate with parental reports and are associated with self-reports of hyperactivity-impulsivity, depression, anxiety, and conduct problems. Participants in the high-inattention group are at greater risk for victimization and poor peer relationships at ages 10 and 11 years after covarying for psychopathology ratings. Self-reported inattention uniquely predicts poor peer relationships longitudinally at age 14 and 15 years. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the importance of examining children's self-report of inattention and identifies inattention as a risk factor for current and later outcomes.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".