The effect of metacognitive executive function training on children's executive function, proactive control, and academic skills.

The current study investigated the effects of metacognitive and executive function (EF) training on childhood EF (inhibition, working memory [WM], cognitive flexibility, and proactive/reactive control) and academic skills (reading, reasoning, and math) among children from disadvantaged backgrounds. Children (N = 134, Mage = 8.70 years) were assigned randomly to the three training groups: (a) metacognitive training of basic EF processes (meta-EF), (b) training of basic EF processes (basic-EF), and (c) active controls (active control). They underwent 16 training sessions over the course of 2 months. No effects of EF and/or metacognitive training were found for academic outcomes. However, both meta-EF and basic-EF groups demonstrated greater gains than the active control group on proactive control engagement and WM, suggesting that EF training promotes a shift to more mature ways of engaging EF. Our findings suggest minimal near- and far-transfer effects of metacognitive training but highlight that proactive engagement of EF can be promoted through EF training in children. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Consistent use of proactive control and relation with academic achievement in childhood.

As children become older, they better maintain task-relevant information in preparation of upcoming cognitive demands. This is referred to as proactive control, which is a key component of cognitive control development. However, it is still uncertain whether children engage in proactive control consistently across different contexts and how proactive control relates to academic abilities. This study used two common tasks-the AX Continuous Performance Task (AX-CPT) and the Cued Task-Switching Paradigm (CTS)-to examine whether proactive control engagement in 102 children (age range: 6.91-10.91 years) converges between the two tasks and predicts academic abilities. Proactive control indices modestly correlated between tasks in higher but not lower working-memory children, suggesting that consistency in proactive control engagement across contexts is relatively low during childhood but increases with working memory capacity. Further, working memory (but not verbal speed) predicted proactive control engagement in both tasks. While proactive control as measured by each task predicted math and reading performance, only proactive control measured by CTS additionally predicted reasoning, suggesting that proactive control can be used as a proxy for academic achievements.

Sensory-motor modality compatibility in multitasking: The influence of processing codes.

Sensory-motor modality compatibility is defined as the similarity between the sensory modality and the modality of response-related effects. Previous dual-task and task-switching studies have shown higher performance costs for coordinating relatively incompatible sensory-motor modality mappings (i.e., auditory-manual and visual-vocal) compared to more compatible mappings (i.e., auditory-vocal and visual-manual). Until now, however, little attention has been paid to potential variability in effects of modality compatibility depending on different processing codes. In the present study, we independently varied the processing codes of input and output (nonverbal-spatial, nonverbal-nominal, verbal-spatial, verbal-nominal) while participants switched between incompatible and compatible sensory-motor modality mappings. Beside higher switch costs for switching between incompatible sensory-motor modality mappings than for switching between compatible mappings, the results revealed stronger effects of modality compatibility on switch costs for verbal input than for nonverbal input codes. This suggests that priming mechanisms between sensory input and compatible motor output are modulated by the processing code of the sensory input. As possible explanations, we assume a higher degree of concordance with output processing codes as well as stronger associations with potential response effects for verbal than for nonverbal input.

The role of learning in sensory-motor modality switching.

Previous research has indicated that modality switching is considerably affected by modality compatibility. It has been shown that switch costs are higher for switching between relatively incompatible sensory-motor modality mappings (i.e., auditory-manual and visual-vocal) compared to switching between compatible mappings (i.e., auditory-vocal and visual-manual). So far, however, it has been unclear whether these findings are influenced by learning processes resulting from very small stimulus sets and a large number of stimulus repetitions. In the present study, we investigated the role of learning concept-to-category associations (Experiment 1) as well as influences of learning concept-to-modality mappings (Experiment 2) on sensory-motor modality switching in semantic categorizations. The results of both experiments revealed shorter overall reaction times due to learning. Additionally, learning of concept-to-category associations (Experiment 1) led to a significant reduction of modality switch costs. Interestingly, however, modality-compatibility effects were neither significantly influenced by learning of concept-to-category associations nor by learning of concept-to-modality mappings. Thus, the present study provides first evidence that learning on the semantic level influences modality switching but it does not significantly affect modality compatibility.

The role of sensory-motor modality compatibility in language processing.

Language processing requires the combination of compatible (auditory-vocal and visual-manual) or incompatible (auditory-manual and visual-vocal) sensory-motor modalities, and switching between these sensory-motor modality combinations is very common in every-day life. Sensory-motor modality compatibility is defined as the similarity of stimulus modality and the modality of response-related sensory consequences. We investigated the influence of sensory-motor modality compatibility during performing language-related cognitive operations on different linguistic levels. More specifically, we used a variant of the task-switching paradigm, in which participants had to switch between compatible or between incompatible sensory-motor modality combinations during a verbal semantic categorization (Experiment 1) or during a word-form decision (Experiment 2). The data show higher switch costs (i.e., higher reaction times and error rates in switch trials compared to repetition trials) in incompatible sensory-motor modality combinations than in compatible sensory-motor modality combinations. This was true for every language-related cognitive operation, regardless of the individual linguistic level. Taken together, the present study demonstrates that sensory-motor modality compatibility plays an important role in modality switching during language processing.