MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3018509217 · doi:10.1093/rof/rfaa013

ADHD Symptoms and Financial Distress

2020· article· en· W3018509217 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Finance Review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDistressAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderFinancial distressPsychiatryPsychologyPaymentClinical psychologyFinanceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We examine the effect of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) on individual-level financial distress. ADHD is the most common mental disorder among children and is characterized by behaviors such as inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsiveness that interfere with school and home life. In a representative panel, we find that individuals with more severe ADHD symptoms during childhood have more difficulty paying bills and are more likely to be delinquent on bill payments in adulthood. Further, those with more severe symptoms are less likely to have precautionary savings and more likely to have to delay buying necessities. These effects exist across the full range of ADHD symptom scores and are not driven by the most severe cases of ADHD; this is consistent with recent evidence that ADHD symptoms occur on a continuum. Preliminary evidence suggests that medication for behavioral issues may mitigate the effect of ADHD symptoms on financial distress.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it