Executive functions are a set of cognitive processes that enable goal-directed behavior, including inhibitory control,working memory, and cognitive flexibility.
These skills are crucial for planning, problem-solving, and self-regulation.
Studying the relationship between executive functions and reading is important because both are fundamental to academic success and lifelong learning.
Understanding how these processes interact can inform educational strategies, improve early identification of learning difficulties, and guide the development of targeted interventions to enhance both reading proficiency and cognitive skills.
Key Points
Rationale
The development of reading skills and executive functions are crucial for academic and professional success, as well as social integration (Rabiner et al., 2016; OECD, 2023).
While existing research has established connections between executive functions and reading comprehension (Gonçalves et al., 2017; Follmer, 2018), there is a lack of comprehensive assessment tools that simultaneously evaluate both constructs.
The AREF was designed based on theoretical models of reading comprehension, such as the Simple View of Reading (Gough & Tunmer, 1986) and the three-factor model of executive functions (Miyake et al., 2000; Diamond, 2013).
By integrating tasks that assess graphophonological-semantic flexibility, inhibitory control, cognitive flexibility, and working memory within reading contexts, the AREF seeks to provide a more nuanced understanding of the interplay between these cognitive processes during reading.
This research is particularly timely given the increasing recognition of the role executive functions play in reading development and academic achievement (Peng & Kievit, 2020; Burgess & Cutting, 2023).
By validating a tool that assesses both constructs simultaneously, this study aims to contribute to more efficient and comprehensive evaluations in clinical and educational settings.
Method
Procedure
The study employed across-sectional designto validate the AREF test. Participants completed the AREF battery along with complementary tests used for validation.
Testing was conducted in two sessions over consecutive days, with each session lasting 30-40 minutes.
Sample
The sample consisted of 93 Brazilian students (aged 8-14) enrolled in 4th to 9th grade. Participants were recruited from both public (n=61) and private (n=32) schools in two Brazilian states.
Exclusion criteria included visual, auditory, neurological, behavioral, or cognitive impairments; developmental, language, or learning disorders; and reading difficulties.
Measures
Statistical measures
The study employed various statistical analyses, including:
Results
Hypothesis 1:AREF subtests will demonstrate convergent validity with established measures of reading comprehension and executive functions.
Results:Confirmed. Significant positive correlations were found between AREF subtests and external measures:
Hypothesis 2:Performance on AREF subtests will differ significantly across grade levels.
Results:Confirmed. ANOVA revealed significant group effects for all subtests (p < 0.001), with 4th and 5th-grade students generally performing lower than higher grades.
Hypothesis 3:Performance on AREF subtests will differ between public and private school students.
Results:Partially confirmed. Significant differences were found for WM (p = 0.038), IC-1 (p = 0.043), and FL (p = 0.049) tasks, with private school students outperforming public school students. No significant differences were found for GSF and IC-2 tasks.
Hypothesis 4:AREF subtests will demonstrate adequate internal consistency.
Results:Partially confirmed. Internal consistency varied across subtests:
Insight
The AREF test demonstrates promise as a novel tool for simultaneously assessing reading comprehension and executive functions in school-aged children.
The significant correlations between AREF subtests and established measures of reading and executive functions provide evidence for its construct validity.
This suggests that the AREF effectively captures the interplay between these cognitive processes during reading tasks.
This approach offers a more ecologically valid method for understanding how these skills interact in real-world reading situations.
The observed differences in performance across grade levels align with developmental literature, indicating that the AREF is sensitive to age-related changes in both reading and executive function abilities.
The differences found between public and private school students on some AREF subtests highlight the potential influence of educational context on cognitive development.
This finding warrants further investigation into the role of socioeconomic factors and educational quality in shaping reading and executive function skills.
Future research should focus on:
Strengths
The study had several methodological strengths, including:
Limitations
The study has several limitations that should be considered:
These limitations impact the generalizability of the findings and highlight the need for further research with larger, more diverse samples and longitudinal designs.
Implications
The development and initial validation of the AREF test have significant implications for both research and practice in educational and clinical psychology:
Variables influencing the results include:
The significance of these findings extends beyond the immediate context of the study, offering a new paradigm for assessing and understanding the cognitive underpinnings of reading comprehension.
As literacy skills become increasingly critical in the digital age, tools like the AREF may play a crucial role in identifying and addressing reading difficulties early in a child’s educational journey.
References
Primary reference
de Oliveira VF, Vial-Martins J, Pinto ALCB, Fonseca RP and Malloy-Diniz LF (2024) A new neuropsychological tool for simultaneous reading and executive functions assessment: initial psychometric properties.Front. Psychol. 15:1399388.https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1399388
Other references
Burgess, A. N., & Cutting, L. E. (2023). The Behavioral and Neurobiological Relationships between Executive Function and Reading: A Review of Current and Preliminary Findings.Mind, Brain, and Education,17(4), 267-278.https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12378
Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions.Annual review of psychology,64(1), 135-168.https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750
Follmer, D. J. (2018). Executive function and reading comprehension: A meta-analytic review.Educational Psychologist,53(1), 42-60.https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2017.1309295
Gonçalves, H. A., Viapiana, V. F., Sartori, M. S., Giacomoni, C. H., Stein, L. M., & Fonseca, R. P. (2017). Funções executivas predizem o processamento de habilidades básicas de leitura, escrita e matemática?.Neuropsicologia Latinoamericana,9(3).
Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability.Remedial and special education,7(1), 6-10.https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325860070010
Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis.Cognitive psychology,41(1), 49-100.https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734
OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volume I): The state of learning and equity in education.PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris.
Peng, P., & Kievit, R. A. (2020). The development of academic achievement and cognitive abilities: A bidirectional perspective.Child Development Perspectives,14(1), 15-20.https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12352
Rabiner, D. L., Godwin, J., & Dodge, K. A. (2016). Predicting academic achievement and attainment: The contribution of early academic skills, attention difficulties, and social competence.School Psychology Review,45(2), 250-267.
Keep Learning
Socratic Questions for Class Discussion:
Saul McLeod, PhD
BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester
Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.
Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc
BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education
Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.
