Decision Making in Children With ADHD Only, ADHD-Anxious/Depressed, and Control Children Using a Child Version of the Iowa Gambling Task
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
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study is to investigate decision making in children with ADHD using a child version of the Iowa Gambling Task (IGT). The effect of internalizing symptoms is also of interest. METHOD: Twenty-one children with ADHD (high anxiety/depression and no anxiety/depression) are compared to an age- and sex-matched control group on the gambling task. Children in the ADHD-alone group demonstrate impaired performance on the IGT. In contrast, children in the control group and the ADHD-anxiety/depression group learn to choose more from the advantageous decks over time. RESULTS: These findings of impaired decision making in children with ADHD parallel findings of real-life decision-making problems in this population. CONCLUSION: Furthermore, the findings suggest that having a high number of internalizing symptoms leads to better performance for children with ADHD on this variant of the IGT.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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