Online social communication patterns among emerging adult women with histories of childhood attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little is known about adult women with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD); however, available evidence suggests that they experience social impairment. Online social networking websites such as Facebook have become endemic outlets through which emerging adults communicate with peers. No study has examined the peer interactions of emerging adults with childhood histories of ADHD in this developmentally relevant online domain. Participants in the current study were an ethnically diverse sample of 228 women, 140 of whom met diagnostic criteria for ADHD in childhood and 88 who composed a matched comparison sample. These women were assessed at 3 time points spanning 10 years (mean age = 9.6 at Wave 1, 14.1 at Wave 2, 19.6 at Wave 3). After statistical control of demographic covariates and comorbidities, childhood ADHD diagnosis predicted, by emerging adulthood, a greater stated preference for online social communication and a greater tendency to have used online methods to interact with strangers. A childhood diagnosis of ADHD also predicted observations of fewer Facebook friends and less closeness and support from Facebook friends in emerging adulthood. These associations were mediated by a composite of face-to-face peer relationship impairment during childhood and adolescence. Intriguingly, women with persistent diagnoses of ADHD from childhood to emerging adulthood differed from women with consistent comparison status in their online social communication; women with intermittent diagnoses of ADHD had scores intermediate between the other 2 groups. Results are discussed within the context of understanding the social relationships of women with childhood histories of ADHD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".