Positive Childhood Experiences and the Indirect Relationship With Improved Emotion Regulation in Adults With ADHD Through Social Support
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals with ADHD report diminished emotion regulation capacities and adversity in childhood detrimentally affects emotion regulation development; however, how positive childhood experiences (PCEs) and whether and how social support are related to PCEs and emotion regulation for those with ADHD is unknown. Objective: To identify direct and indirect associations between PCEs and social support to emotion regulation outcomes in adults with ADHD. Method: Adults with ADHD ( n = 81) reported PCEs, current social support, and emotion regulation. Conditional effects modeling examined the direct and indirect relationships between PCEs and emotion dysregulation through social support. Results: Higher PCEs were indirectly related to improved emotion regulation through increased social support generally (β = −.70, 95% CI [−1.32, −0.17], and specifically through belonging (β = −.43, 95% CI [ −0.87, −0.05], self-esteem (β = −.61, 95% CI [−1.08, −0.27], and tangible social support (β = −.50, 95% CI [−1.07, −0.02]. Conclusions: PCEs may protect emotion regulation in adults with ADHD through social support, possibly through facilitating social connections, increasing access to social support, and sustaining emotion regulation strategies.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".