Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
EF in Development (Deve Trajectories (Cog Flex (Different trajectories…
EF in Development
Deve Trajectories
Cog Flex
Dimensional card sort task + WCST
3 perseverate on DCCS even when explicitly told rule, switch by 5
WCST = adult performance by 10 yrs (early studies)
However, more prolonged deve
Worse in 13-15 than adults -
Lin et al (2000)
Different trajectories
Perseverative error = slow decline
Distraction error = dramatic improvement - attention
Planning
Hanoi
3 ring problem: maturity = 6yrs (strategic behaviour/planning)
4 ring problem: adult performance not reached until 12 yrs
London
Gradual improvement from 11-15
Improvement 8-10 and 15-19 on more difficult move trails
Two tasks = different results - messy EF
Conflict processing
Child stroop task
Even very young = resist conflict
Performance steadily improved between 3.5 and 7 yrs
Ability to resist conflict on colour-word continues to improve into adolescence
Response inhibition
Development across childhood - improvement
Adult level performance reached mid adolescence
Deferred gratificaion
Relatively late development of abilty
Later of hot vs cold
Longer delay to get reward = less likely to wait as the reliability decreases
Difficult - differences in tasks across age
General tendencies
Greatest period between 6-8
Moderate increased 9-12
Adults levels between adolescence and early 20s
Good EF important?
More important than IQ for predicting school readiness
Predict maths + reading competence throughout the school years
At 4.5 yrs predicts complex reasoning at 15
Predicts success throughout life (career, marriage, mental health)
Marshmallow Test follow up
Associated with
Planning/coping abilities, academic performance in adolscence
Go/no go performance in adulthood
PFC function during emotional go/no go task
High predictive power
High delayers = really differentiation between go and no go
Flexibility engage region when needed to stop
Importance of self control
Moffitt et al (2011)
Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Developmental Study - 1037 NZ, born 72/3
Large scale longitudinal study
Observational + questionnaire ratings (3, 5, 7, 9, 11)
Lack of control
Impulsive aggression
Lack of persistence
Inattention
Impulsivity
Adult outcomes on health, wealth, criminal records
Results
Gradient of self control
Poorer self control in childhood associated with lower health/wealth + more criminal convictions
Partly adolescent snares (enviro)
Some spontaneously improved over time (SC + outcomes) therefore not fully deterministic
Learn about EF from Deve
Tool to understand process of interest
EF = 1st conceptualised as supervisory control system implemented in prefrontal cortex
Modular explanation relies on homunculus
Not unitary
Miyake
Suggests multiple interacting processes
Adult studies
Evidence
Lesion patients rarely show global dysfunction (not single)
Brain imaging - different neural correlates of different EFS
Measures correlate poorly
Factor analysis = different factors
Different developmental trajectories
Deve trajectories
Used to study group's atypicalities
Traditional: compared age matched groups to see if they differ
Trajectory across age = important signal
So don't collapse across age - differences may not be found otherwise
Neural Deve
Brain development
Grey matter maturation of cortical surface (5-20), PFC = latest to develop
Positive correlation between white matter integrity and age in several PFC regions
Typical Development
Inhibition
Functional Development
Children 8-12 yrs did not activate right ventrolateral PFC across two tasks of inhibition
RV PFC = important for stopping behaviour/inhibitory control
Flanker task
Go/No-go
Results not explained by performance differences
As with WM, immaturity associated with reduced PFC activation
However
Children 6-10 vs adults
Children activated DLPFC more than adults despite worse performance - difference brain area, potentially less efficient
Durston et al (2002)
Tamm et al (2002)
Both increases and decreased in PFC response with age
19 ps scanned, 8-20yrs
Suggest both previous studies are right
Working Memory
Functional Development
Kwon et al (2002)
Ps 7-22yrs, fMRI
Spatial 2-back task
Performance improved with age
Activity in dorsolateral and ventrolateral PFC increased with age
Working harder as Ps got older- related to performance or age
Results remained after controlling for performance - age is important
General maturation regardless of task performance - even in the absence of training
Structural Development
Correlates between white matter integrity and WM performance between 8-18 yrs
As performance + age increased so did levels of WM
Lesions
Prefrontal lesions
Lesions to PFC = poor at planing + organisation in everyday life
Not always evident in lab: more ecologically valid tasks needed
Multiple Errands Task
Buy several items
Buy something in each shop
Find out various into
Be back in 15 mins
Ps did poorly on this task
Developmental timing
Social/moral development arrested at immature stage
Early frontal damage = neurological substrate for special type of learning disability
Insight, foresight, social judgement, empathy, complex reasoning
Brain regions underlying EF
Thought to rely particularly on frontal lobe function (PFC)
Very large in humans relative to body size
Network of brain regions (like all cog processes)
Different EFs engage different brain networks
PFC = necessary across all EFs
Train
Does it work?
Dunning et al (2013)
CogMed
34 low MW aged 7-9
Improvement on WM - not classroom/other cognitive tests
Randomised control trail
Melby-Lervag et al (2016)
Meta analysis
87 WM training studies
ST, specific effects
Verbal = near transfer effects
Visuospatial = potentially maintained effects
Not generalizable to "real world" cog skills
WM improves most for those who already have good WM
Tools of Mind
Vygotskyian theory - structured play other than formal instruction
Results
Tools = better than controls
Relative performance = better for more demanding tasks
Correlated with academic measures: generalisable
Helps those with low EF - good EF = unclear
Diamond et al (2011)
Repeated practice + increased challenge = successful
Trained to spend 80% of day promoting these skills
40 EF-promoting play activities
Randomised trail of 147 preschoolers with low SES
CogMed
WM = crucial to academic success (reading, maths, classroom behaviour)
Poor WM = difficulty following instruction + maintaining attentional focus
Computerised WM training package
Games that tax WM and get increasingly difficult
Holmes et al (2009)
22 9-10yrs with poor WM (+controls)
WM performance improved, into normal range, + sustained 6mnths
Maths improved after 6 mnths but potentially repeat testing
Behaviours = not measured
Do not generalised to other EFs
Training
EF = strongly linked to school achievement + future success (therefore focus on training)
Focus on low SES with disproportionately low EF entering school
Show greatest improvements - level playing field
Computerised training
Exercise
Martial arts and mindfulness
Specialised classroom curricula
Defining/Measuring
What are EFs?
Goal-driven behaviour occurs in spite of external distrations
Multiple inter-related high level cognitive skills
WM, Goal directed behaviour, Attentional control, Planning, Problem solving, Decision making, Flexibility, Emotional regulation, Delay of gratification, Inhibitory control, Speed of processing
How do we measure?
Wisconsin Card Sorting Task (WCST)
Sort cards under 4 smaples
Announce rules
Rule change after 10 correct placements
Cue to change tactics and behave flexibility
Tests set shifting - ability to behave flexibly when task demands change
Inflexibility = perseveration
Tower of Hanoi
Move all the disks to stack C
Only move one disk at a time
Larger can't go on smaller
Counterintuitive moves - requires extensive planning ability
N-Back Task
Press a key when a letter displayed is the same as N screens ago
Tests working memory
Can manipulate difficultly by number of backs
Stroop Effect
Name the ink colour the word is written in
Response for the first list are quicker + more accurate
Task measures ability to resist conflict (inhibitory control, conflict monitoring)
Surprise meaning tonnage colour
Go/No Go
Press key when a letter appears, unless X
Measures response inhibition
Error rates even in adults
Problems
Difficult to design task measuring single function
Tower of Hanoi - planning, memory, ability to inhibit pre-potent responses
Therefore failure may be due to other domains
Not always idea for developing pop - try to deve adaptive versions, child friendly
Adapting for Deve
Marshmallow Test
Mischel et al (2011)
Test self-control in pre-schoolers by delay of gratification
Predictive
Academic performance
Sense of better physical health
Mental health (self worth, coping with stress)
Later brain function
Focused at 7 = physical health at 30
Settling for less desirable reward = 30% more likely to be overweight
Resisting temptation in favour of LT goals
Early ability = buffer
Factors affecting
Strategies
Distracting themselves
Pretending marshmallow isn't there/edible (altering representation)
If instructed to distract = increase waiting times - external factors, not all self control
Reliability
Reliable = waited sig longer - reasoned beliefs about whether waiting would pay off
Social factors
Rational behaviour - unreliable adult = less likely to wait
Kidd et al (2013)
Cohort effects
2000s = 1min longer than 1980s, 2min longer than 1960s
Carlson et al (2018)
Improved education, tech encouraging abstract/symbolic thought
Culture/ Socialisation
Cameroonian performance better than german
C = calm, control, not in way of adults, hierarchical
G = self determination/independent, socialisation, child centred
Lamm et al (2017)
Really measuring?
Willpower + day of gratification - cognitive control
'Hot EF - surpress/override desire for reward
Predictive power - crucial early capacity
Not fixed/fully deterministic - experimental + sociocultural factors affect
Limitations
Small/unrepresentative samples (high SES)
Not adjusted for confounding factors
Problematic
Replication
Watts et al (2018)
- N=900
Link = smaller effect - waiting time age 4 + achievement 15
Smaller still - controlling for family background/early cog ability
If so important then unlikely to be altered by interventions
Wider context = important
Other EF tasks
Pokemon Go/No go task
Day/night stroop task
PETA
Preschool Executive Task Assesment
Ecologically valid EF test
Can pick up if deficits in everyday life
Creative - making a picture
Planning: which goes first
Inhibition control: wait for glue to dry
WM: remembering steps
Self direction + multiple interacting EFs
Strength to identify if children need support and in which area
Qualitative coding + numerical scoring = rich profile