Children’s Perceptions of Their ADHD Symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".