Examining ADHD Children's Learning Behaviours: The Impact of Parental Self-Efficacy and Relationship Quality Amid COVID-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to explore differences in learning behaviours between children with and without ADHD during the COVID-19 pandemic, considering parental self-efficacy and parent-child relationship quality (e.g., closeness and conflict). Data was used from a nationwide survey conducted in Spring 2021, encompassing 468 parents of school-aged children (aged 3-18 years), comparing 278 parents of children with ADHD (Mage = 9.88) to 190 parents of typically developing children (Mage= 9.45). The study found that children of parents who reported higher self-efficacy and parent-child relationship closeness exhibited higher/more positive learning behaviours, while children of parents who reported higher parent-child relationship conflict demonstrated lower/poorer learning behaviours. Only in children with ADHD, learning behaviours were lower when parents and children demonstrated closer relationships. Additionally, parent-child relationship conflict partially mediated the link between parental self-efficacy and learning behaviours in children with ADHD. These findings highlight parents' struggles in supporting children with ADHD during COVID-19.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".