Unraveling the relationship between executive function and mind wandering in childhood ADHD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is one of the most prevalent neurodevelopmental disorders in children. According to developmental literature findings, there is a link between executive function (EF) and ADHD. Although EF deficits vary across ADHD presentations in children, working memory capacity is commonly associated with attention impairments. Notably, deficits in working memory capacity are also observed in frequent mind wandering reports for typically developing children. Mind wandering is shifting attention away from a current task to an unrelated thought. To explore the relationship between EF and mind wandering in children with ADHD (n = 47) and further compare our current sample to a typically developing (control) group from a previous study (n = 47), all participants completed three EF-related tasks. They concurrently reported if they were on task or mind wandering. Our results indicate better short-term memory capacity predicted lower mind wandering frequency in children who reported high levels of ADHD symptoms. Similar trends were observed for working memory capacity and ADHD symptomatology. Children with ADHD also reported more overall and unintentional mind wandering on questionnaires compared to children without ADHD. However, the relationship between EF and mind wandering did not differ between these groups. The current study suggests memory-related cognitive abilities may inform our understanding and management of mind wandering in children, driving the development of interventions targeting attention regulation.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".