The Effect of Social Skills Training on Subjective Well-being, Alexithymia, and Social Competence in Children with Oppositional Defiant Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Purpose: Oppositional defiant disorder is one of the most common disruptive behavioral disorders and people with this disorder are facing with problems in the field of mental well-being, alexithymia, and social competence. The aim of this research was to investigate the effect of social skills training on subjective well-being, alexithymia, and social competence of children with oppositional defiant disorder. Method: This research was a semi-experimental study with a pre-test and post-test control group design. The research sample consisted of 40 children with oppositional defiant disorder who had been selected by convenience sampling from among those referring to the counseling centers of Qarchak city in 2017. They were assigned either to the experimental or the control group (20 children per group). The experimental group received social skills intervention in 8 sessions of 60 minutes during one month. Research tools included oppositional defiant disorder scale (Hommersen et al., 2006), subjective well-being questionnaire (Keyes & Magyar-Moe, 2003), Toronto alexithymia scale (Bagby & et al, 1994), and social competence questionnaire (Flener & et al, 1990). Data were analyzed by univariate analysis of covariance. Results: The results showed that there was a significant difference between the experimental and control groups in all the three variables of subjective well-being, alexithymia, and social competence. In the other words, social skills training significantly led to the increase of subjective well-being and social competence and decrease of alexithymia in children with oppositional defiant disorder (P<0.01).
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".