Relationship Between Behavioural Disorders and Social Cognition among Orphans in Saudi Arabia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the relationship between behavioural disorders and social cognition among orphans in Saudi Arabia by adopting a phenomenological qualitative approach. To achieve this aim, 50 subjects were selected to participate in this study through a purposive sampling. The participants were subjected to a semi-structured interview session which lasted from 45 minutes to an hour. After data has been gathered, Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis was used to analyse data into themes which were categorized into three: Symptoms of Behavioural Disorders, Social Cognitions, and Factors. The results of the study showed that emotional and behavioural disorders that orphans face in Saudi Arabia were manifested by symptoms of disorders such as Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, Oppositional Defiant Disorder, and Social Phobia. Factors that tend to have a significant effect on behavioural problems among orphans consisted of traumatic events, events prior to admittance in the orphanage such as physical abuse, and the overall physical environment of the orphanage, which can be at risk of being conducive for bullying and fighting among orphans. Furthermore, there might be a relationship between behavioural disorders and social cognition among orphans in Saudi Arabia.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".