Effectiveness of Exposure Therapy on Life Satisfaction and Cognitive Flexibility in Adults with ADHD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of exposure therapy in enhancing life satisfaction and cognitive flexibility in adults with ADHD. This study employed a randomized controlled trial design, with 30 adults diagnosed with ADHD randomly assigned to an experimental group (n = 15) receiving eight sessions of exposure therapy or a control group (n = 15) receiving no intervention. Life satisfaction and cognitive flexibility were assessed at baseline, post-treatment, and five-month follow-up using the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) and the Cognitive Flexibility Inventory (CFI), respectively. Data analysis was conducted using repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) to examine within- and between-group differences over time, with post-hoc pairwise comparisons performed using the Bonferroni adjustment. The results indicated a significant main effect of time and group, as well as a significant interaction effect between time and group for both life satisfaction and cognitive flexibility (p < 0.01). Post-hoc analyses showed that the experimental group demonstrated significant improvements in both variables from baseline to post-treatment (p < 0.001), with these gains maintained at follow-up. In contrast, the control group showed no significant changes over time. The findings suggest that exposure therapy effectively enhances life satisfaction and cognitive flexibility in adults with ADHD, with long-term benefits observed at follow-up. Exposure therapy appears to be a promising intervention for improving life satisfaction and cognitive flexibility in adults with ADHD. By reducing avoidance behaviors and promoting adaptive cognitive responses, this approach may help individuals with ADHD develop greater emotional and cognitive adaptability. The sustained benefits observed at follow-up suggest that exposure therapy may provide long-lasting improvements in quality of life for this population.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".