Overview of Executive Functions in Middle Childhood and Adolescence

By Dr Aishah Abdul Rahaman
Education Research Scientist, OER Centre for Science of Learning in Education, NIE, NTU
Research Scientist, National Institute of Education - Office of Education Research, NTU
Published: 1 May 2023

What are Executive Functions?

Executive functions (EF) refer to several mental processes that allow us to think and act in a goal-directed manner. They are particularly needed when responding in a habitual or instinctual pattern would not aid with goal attainment (Diamond, 2013). There is a general consensus that EF comprises three basic components — working memory, inhibition and cognitive flexibility (Miyake et al., 2000). 

(1)    Working memory (WM) refers to the ability to hold things in mind, while updating or manipulating them as required. WM enables us to listen to instructions and decode them into actions, do mental calculations, and understand a paragraph in a book we are reading. 

(2)    Inhibition is the ability to suppress information or behaviour that are irrelevant or inappropriate. Inhibitory abilities help us with engaging in a conversation while filtering out background noises, resisting the temptation to cut the line while out to buy something, and pushing out distracting thoughts while trying to complete an assignment. 

(3)    Cognitive flexibility refers to the ability to alternate between different goals and perspectives. It is a skill that allows us to adjust and improvise when our plans are interrupted, and with making adjustments when we notice a better method to solving a problem. 

Although WM, inhibition and cognitive flexibility have been classified as three distinct cognitive processes, they often act together in enabling us to behave adaptively and are supported by overlapping brain regions, particularly the prefrontal regions of the brain (Duncan & Owen, 2000). 

EFs develop over a protracted period of time starting from infancy and maturing in early adulthood. While there are slight differences in their patterns of growth, all three EF components show robust development in the period from childhood to adolescence (Ferguson et al., 2021; Richardson et al., 2018). 

The Singapore Context

The organisation of EFs: Working memory, inhibition and cognitive flexibility are generally thought to be three distinct processes that represent EFs. However, this distinction is found to occur gradually with development. In very young children, the three EF components are found to be less distinct or differentiated (Wiebe et al., 2011). 

A local study found that a two-component structure best defined EFs in 6- to 10-year-old students in Singapore, with working memory being a distinct component, but less distinction being observed between inhibition and cognitive flexibility. Signs of distinction between inhibition and cognitive flexibility only started emerging at the age of 11. Between the ages of 11 to 15, the structure of EF gradually transitioned from a two-component structure to a completely differentiated three-component structure (Lee et al., 2013). The findings from this study underscore the importance of the transitional adolescent years for EF development.

Factors associated with EFs:  Socioeconomic status is one factor that has been consistently associated with EF abilities (Duncan & Magnuson, 2012; Lawson et al., 2018). Specifically, individuals of higher socioeconomic status typically exhibit better EF skills. Socioeconomic status is often examined through household income, maternal or paternal education, or a composite of these and related factors. In a recent study with primary and secondary school students in Singapore, similar findings were observed. However, different indices of socioeconomic factors were found to be associated with EF performance in primary and secondary school students. In primary school students aged between 9 – 10 years old, familial income was most closely associated with their EF performance. In contrast, in secondary school students aged between 13 – 14 years old, paternal education level was the socioeconomic measure most closely associated with student’s EF performance (Abdul Rahman, unpublished findings). 

In Practice

Executive functions are important skills for multiple domains in life including education (Moffitt et al., 2011). Numerous studies point to a strong association between EFs and student’s academic performance (Blair & Razza, 2007; Spiegel et al., 2021). In Singapore there is some evidence indicating that working memory performance is associated with student’s math performance across the primary and secondary school ages (Lee & Bull, 2016). Critically, this association was found to be the strongest in lower primary students (Primary 1 and 2). This implies that interventions targeting working memory and math may be particularly useful when addressed in the early years.  

Takeaways

• Executive functions are thought to comprise three basic processes: working memory, inhibition and shifting. 
• These three components are less distinct in the early years, with differentiation emerging in early adolescence.
• Socioeconomic status is closely and positively associated with EF performance. In Singapore students, different indices of socioeconomic status predict EF performance in primary and secondary school students.
• EF performance is an important predictor of math performance. In the local context, this relationship is observed to be strongest in early primary levels. 

References

Blair, C., & Razza, R. P. (2007). Relating effortful control, executive function, and false-belief understanding to emerging math and literacy ability in kindergarten. Child Development, 78(2), 647–663. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01019.x

Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135-168. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750

Duncan, G. J., & Magnuson, K. (2012). Socioeconomic status and cognitive functioning: moving from correlation to causation. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 3(3), 377-386. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1176

Duncan, J., & Owen, A. M. (2000). Common regions of the human frontal lobe recruited by diverse cognitive demands. Trends in Neurosciences, 23(10), 475-483. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-2236(00)01633-7

Ferguson, H. J., Brunsdon, V. E., & Bradford, E. E. (2021). The developmental trajectories of executive function from adolescence to old age. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-80866-1

Lawson, G. M., Hook, C. J., & Farah, M. J. (2018). A meta-analysis of the relationship between socioeconomic status and executive function performance among children. Developmental Science, 21(2), 10.1111/desc.12529. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12529

Lee, K., & Bull, R. (2016). Developmental changes in working memory, updating, and math achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(6), 869. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000090

Lee, K., Bull, R., & Ho, R. M. (2013). Developmental changes in executive functioning. Child Development, 84(6), 1933-1953. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12096

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

Moffitt, T. E., Arseneault, L., Belsky, D., Dickson, N., Hancox, R. J., Harrington, H., . . . Caspi, A. (2011). A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public safety. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(7), 2693–2698. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1010076108

Richardson, C., Anderson, M., Reid, C. L., & Fox, A. M. (2018). Development of inhibition and switching: A longitudinal study of the maturation of interference suppression and reversal processes during childhood. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 34, 92-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2018.03.002

Spiegel, J. A., Goodrich, J. M., Morris, B. M., Osborne, C. M., & Lonigan, C. J. (2021). Relations between executive functions and academic outcomes in elementary school children: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 147(4), 329–351. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000322

Wiebe, S. A., Sheffield, T., Nelson, J. M., Clark, C. A., Chevalier, N., & Espy, K. A. (2011). The structure of executive function in 3-year-olds. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 108(3), 436-452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2010.08.008