Reduced organizational skills in adults with ADHD are due to deficits in persistence, not in strategies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is commonly associated with poor organizational skills, as per the definition of ADHD. However, the contribution of each of the following factors (and their interactions) to the aforementioned poor organization, while comparing individuals with and without ADHD, has not been analyzed in-depth: Work Organization; Communication Clarity; Punctuality; Goal-oriented behaviour; Assiduity; Workspace Organization; Strategies; and Attentiveness. The purpose is to examine the self-reported levels of organizational skills in adults with and without ADHD. METHODS: = 303 with a diagnosis of ADHD) adults from the community were recruited online. Participants completed a measure of organizational skills and a screening measure of ADHD. RESULTS: Participants with a diagnosis of ADHD displayed lower scores than individuals without a diagnosis of ADHD on all organizational skills with the exception of using strategies to remain organized and learn new information. Higher levels of education were associated with higher levels of organizational skills. While there was no difference between males and females with ADHD, females without ADHD scored higher than males without ADHD. CONCLUSION: This study supports that individuals with ADHD can efficiently develop strategies, but may have difficulties using those strategies in a continuous manner. Suggestions to increase organizational skills in adults with ADHD are presented.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".