Positive Illusory Bias and the Self-Protective Hypothesis in Children With Learning Disabilities
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
We tested the hypothesis that overestimations of performance by children with learning disabilities (LD) are self-protective and will dissipate following positive feedback. Twenty-three boys and 17 girls with LD (ages 10.6 to 13.5 years) and a control group of non-LD matched children (22 boys and 17 girls) provided a prediction of their performance on a spelling test prior to completing the test. Subsequently, they were randomly assigned to either a positive feedback or a no-feedback condition. Finally, they provided a second prediction of performance on an equivalent spelling test. In children with LD, there was a positive bias in their predictions of performance, and, following positive feedback, their predictions became accurate. In children without LD, there was no positive bias and no effect of feedback. The results provide further support for the presence of a positive illusory bias and for the self-protective hypothesis in children with LD.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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