Memory Profile of Children with Nonverbal Learning Disability
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
The aim of this study was to compare visual and verbal memory in children with nonverbal learning disability (NLD) using the Children's Memory Scale and to identify the profile of strengths and weaknesses in visual memory abilities. Performance was significantly lower on measures of visual than verbal memory, indicating that children with NLD have deficits in visual memory despite adequate verbal memory. A unique pattern of performance emerged for the visual but not the verbal subtests. Performance on the Faces Immediate subtest was well below average, although other measures of visual memory were within the average range. Hence, it appears that children with NLD have a specific deficit on immediate memory for faces. This facial memory deficit may be linked to a deficit in right hemisphere functioning, which has already been implicated in facial processing and may also be linked with other disorders (e.g., autism spectrum disorder) in which similar facial processing deficits have been documented. More research is needed to further understand the visual memory profile of children with NLD and to inform instruction and remediation.
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 | 0.004 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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 it