Developmentally Relevant Career Constructs: Response Patterns of Youth with ADHD and LDs
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
The vocational needs of adolescents with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and Learning Disabilities (LDs) have been generally overlooked in vocational research. Exploration of relevant career development constructs can illuminate our understanding of the post-school transition needs and strengths of youth with disabilities. Given the increasing prevalence of these disorders, this study compared the response patterns of 258 adolescents with ADHD and LDs on dimensions of career thoughts, attitudes, and vocational identity. Participants were administered the Career Thoughts Inventory (CTI),Career Maturity Inventory –R (CMI-R), and Vocational Identity (VI) to examine the differences in response patterns. Using univariate ANOVA analyses, results showed that levels of VI were significantly related to all CTI subscales and a CMI-R subscale. A diagnosis of LD or ADHD was significantly related to the Decision-Making Confusion (DMC) subscale of the CTI and the CMI-Att subscale of the CMI-R. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it