Concept Mapping and the CO-OP Approach with Adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Exploring Participant Experiences
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
Background: To explore the experiences of adolescents with ASD participating in a novel occupationally based intervention. Methods: The intervention used concept mapping in combination with the CO-OP approach with 10 adolescents with ASD in a 4-week program focused on developing life skills they deemed as important in their transition to adulthood. A descriptive qualitative approach was employed using deductive thematic analysis informed by Self-Determination Theory and occupationally relevant theoretical frameworks. This study is part of a larger feasibility project and focuses on the analysis of participant reflections and researcher field notes. Results: Five themes emerged: finding a sense of balance through negotiating tensions; a sense of “we” and a sense of “I”; selecting purposeful, meaningful, and authentic occupations; multimodal tools; and action through participating in doing. Conclusion: This study highlights valuable participant insights into their involvement in a novel occupationally based intervention that will inform the program’s on-going development and implementation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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