Maternal attributions and child oppositional behavior: A longitudinal study of boys with and without attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors examined changes over a 1-year period in mothers' attributions for child behavior and child oppositional behavior among 53 mothers and nonproblem sons and 44 mothers and sons with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Boys averaged 8 years of age (SD = 11 months) at Time 1. Families were primarily of European Canadian cultural background and most were middle to upper middle class. Initial levels of child oppositionality did not predict changes in mothers' attributions over time. However, initial levels of mothers' attributions of oppositional child behavior to internal, stable, and global causes positively predicted child oppositional behavior, controlling for ADHD versus nonproblem status and the child's initial level of oppositional behavior. Although initial levels of overreactive and nonresponsive parenting also positively predicted child oppositional behavior, the contribution of mothers' attributions remained significant even with parenting variables controlled. Results suggest that mothers' attributions of child oppositional behavior to internal, stable, and global causes may contribute to maintenance of child problems over time and that these parenting cognitions have importance as intervention targets.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".