Executive function in teen and adult women: Association with maternal status and early adversity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine the impact of maternal age on executive function and the moderating effects of women's maternal status and early-life experiences. Four groups of women were assessed as a function of their age (teens vs. adults) and maternal status (mothers vs. nonmothers). Participants completed executive function tests, including Spatial Working Memory (SWM), Intra-Extra-Dimensional-Set-Shift (IED), and Stockings of Cambridge (SOC). Women also completed the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire to assess their experiences of early adversity. Results showed that for the IED-task, there were main effects of age and maternal status and an interaction between the two; adults performed better than teens, mothers performed better than nonmothers, and teen nonmothers performed the least well of all groups. For the SWM-task, adults performed better than teens. Our results indicate that although age is an important factor for proper executive functioning, different tasks are affected differently and other factors such as maternity and adverse childhood experiences moderate this functioning.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".