Codevelopment of Movement Competence and Executive Function in Childhood: A Roadmap Toward a Bioecologically Grounded Mixed-Methods Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Movement competence (MC) and executive function (EF) are tightly interwoven developmental domains, each shaping and being shaped by the other throughout childhood, yet most research relies on decontextualized assessments and rarely examines the lived experiences that shape development. The purpose of this article is to outline a bioecologically grounded, mixed-methods roadmap for studying MC–EF codevelopment. Guided by Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model, the roadmap integrates dynamic MC assessments, psychometric and behavioral EF measures, and qualitative insights from children and caregivers. An explanatory sequential design links quantitative classification of MC–EF profiles with in-depth qualitative exploration of movement experiences, child characteristics, and contextual influences, supported by joint display integration. A longitudinal extension captures how these processes evolve across seasonal and multiyear timescales. By situating MC–EF development within its real-world bioecology, this roadmap offers researchers and practitioners a flexible yet rigorous model for advancing both theory and application in the exercise-cognition field.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".