MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080281852 · doi:10.1177/0829573512451972

Children’s Perceptions of Their ADHD Symptoms

2012· article· en· W2080281852 on OpenAlexaff
Judith Wiener, Molly Malone, Angela Varma, Clarisa Markel, Daniella Biondic, Rosemary Tannock, Tom Humphries

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of School Psychology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAttributionAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderFeelingClinical psychologyPerceptionDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatrySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the perceptions of children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) of their ADHD symptoms in terms of the positive illusory bias (PIB), their attributions for their problem behaviors, and their beliefs about whether their problem behaviors and disorder are stigmatizing. Participants were 152 9- to 14-year-old children (86 ADHD). Children with ADHD demonstrated a PIB for their ADHD symptoms; the discrepancy between their self-reports and parent reports was greater than for children without ADHD. They also viewed their self-identified most problematic behavior as more uncontrollable and stigmatizing (i.e., bothersome to others, leading to differential treatment, and embarrassing) than comparison children. Their perception that their problem behaviors and their disorder were stigmatizing was negatively associated with behavioral self-concept and self-esteem. These results suggest that school psychologists should interpret the self-reports of problem behaviors of children with ADHD with caution while being aware of the vulnerability of these children to feelings of stigma.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations83
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of School PsychologySame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207