A Multi-Method Examination of Peer Functioning in Children with and without Cognitive Disengagement Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Cognitive disengagement syndrome (CDS) includes excessive daydreaming, mental confusion, and hypoactive behaviors that are distinct from attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder inattentive (ADHD-IN) symptoms. A growing number of studies indicate that CDS symptoms may be associated with ratings of social withdrawal. However, it is important to examine this association in children specifically recruited for the presence or absence of CDS, and to incorporate multiple methods including direct observations of peer interactions. The current study builds on previous research by recruiting children with and without clinically elevated CDS symptoms and using a multi-method, multi-informant design including recess observations and parent, teacher, and child rating scales. METHOD: Participants were 207 children in grades 2-5 (63.3% male), including 103 with CDS and 104 without CDS, closely matched on grade and sex. RESULTS: Controlling for family income, medication status, internalizing symptoms, and ADHD-IN severity, children with CDS were observed during recess to spend more time alone or engaging in parallel play, as well as less time involved in direct social interactions, than children without CDS. Children with CDS were also rated by teachers as being more asocial, shy, and socially disinterested than children without CDS. Although children with and without CDS did not differ on parent- or self-report ratings of shyness or social disinterest, children with CDS rated themselves as lonelier than children without CDS. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that children with CDS have a distinct profile of peer functioning and point to the potential importance of targeting withdrawal in interventions for youth with elevated CDS symptoms.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".