Liens entre les pratiques éducatives, le style d’attachement du parent et les comportements d’inattention et d’hyperactivité /impulsivité
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette étude vise à identifier les liens entre les styles d’attachement des parents (n=110) des enfants ayant un trouble déficitaire de l’attention avec ou sans hyperactivité (TDAH) et les pratiques éducatives associées aux dimensions spécifiques du TDAH (inattention et hyperactivité). Les parents des enfants ayant un TDAH semblent être pour la plupart insécurisés et particulièrement préoccupés. Les parents insécurisés en général et les préoccupés en particulier rapportent significativement moins de discipline verbale positive, moins de félicitations et récompenses, moins de supervision adaptée et plus de discipline sévère et inconstante que les parents sécurisés. Par ailleurs, plus les parents exercent une pauvre supervision plus les enfants déploient des comportements hyperactifs. En somme cette étude souligne l’importance relative du style d’attachement des parents et de leurs pratiques éducatives comme facteur de risque au développement ou à l’exacerbation des symptômes pouvant s’apparenter au TDAH.
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 | 0.010 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".