MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061203113 · doi:10.5539/jedp.v3n1p51

Executive Functions and Their Differential Contribution to Sustained Attention in 5- to 8-Year-Old Children

2013· article· en· W2061203113 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Educational and Developmental Psychology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorking memoryPsychologyExecutive functionsConstruct (python library)Task (project management)Cognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyFocus (optics)CognitionNeuroscienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Everyday routine in general and school settings in particular make high demands on children’s abilities to sustaintheir focus of attention over longer time periods. School tasks thus require the child to accomplish the task on anappropriate level of performance while maintaining the focus of attention even under repetitious or distractingconditions. However, sustained attention (SA) may be a more heterogeneous construct than commonly assumedas it requires the individual not only to sustain attentional capacities but also to store and maintain the task rule(working memory), to inhibit inappropriate responses (inhibition), and to switch according to requirements(switching). It might thus involve processes counted among executive functions (EF). In the present study,performance in EF tasks (covering the core components inhibition, switching, and working memory) and in a SAtask was assessed in 118 children, aged between 5;0 and 8;11 years. Similar age-dependent performancetrajectories were found in EF components and SA, indicating ongoing performance improvements between 5until at least 8 years of age in SA and in EF. Interrelations between single EF components and SA showed to besmall to moderate. Finally, different patterns of SA performance predictions were found in age-homogeneoussubgroups with inhibition being crucial for SA performance in the youngest and switching in the oldest agegroup. Taken as a whole, even though similarities in assumed developmental trajectories and substantialinterrelations point to common underlying processes in EF and SA, age-dependent patterns of explained varianceindicate clear discriminability.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.434
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it