Mothers' Attributions for Behavior in Nonproblem Boys, Boys With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, and Boys With Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and Oppositional Defiant Behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study compared attributions for child behavior among mothers of 38 nonproblem boys, 26 boys with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and 25 boys with ADHD and oppositional defiant (OD) behavior. Boys ranged from 7 to 10 years of age. To capture different aspects of mothers' attributions, 2 assessment methods were employed: (a) ratings of the internality, controllability, globality, and stability of causes for written descriptions of child behavior and (b) coding of the types of causal attributions that mothers provided in vivo while watching their own child's behavior. In response to the written descriptions of child behavior, mothers of boys with ADHD/OD rated the causes of oppositional and inattentive-impulsive child behaviors as more stable and global than did mothers of nonproblem boys. In identifying causes of their own child's failure on lab tasks, mothers of boys with ADHD/OD provided more child-negative attributional causes than did mothers of either ADHD only or nonproblem boys. Implications for assessing and understanding attributions in families of children with ADHD and OD are discussed.
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 | 0.012 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".