Inattentive and hyperactive traits differentially associate with interindividual functional synchrony during video viewing in young children without ADHD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inattention and hyperactivity present on a spectrum and may influence the way children perceive and interact with the world. We investigated whether normative variation in inattentive and hyperactive traits was associated with differences in brain function, while children watched clips from an age-appropriate television program. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data and parent reports of inattention and hyperactivity traits were collected from 81 children 4-7 years of age with no parent-reported diagnoses. Data were analyzed using intersubject correlations (ISCs) in mixed effects models to determine if inattentive and hyperactive traits were associated with idiosyncrasy of fMRI response to the video. We hypothesized that pairs of children with higher average inattention and hyperactivity scores would show less interindividual brain synchrony to one another than pairs with lower average scores on these traits. Video watching engaged widespread visual, auditory, default mode and dorsal prefrontal regions. Inattention and hyperactivity were separably associated with ISC in many of these regions. Our findings suggest that the spectrum of inattention and hyperactivity traits in children without ADHD are differentially associated with neural processing of naturalistic video stimuli, which may have implications for understanding how children with different levels of these traits process audiovisual information in unconstrained conditions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".