Factor structure and aetiological architecture of the BRIEF: A twin study

The association of parent-reported executive functioning, reading, and math is explained by nature, not nurture

According to the hybrid model (van Bergen, van der Leij, & de Jong, 2014), the significant association among executive functioning (EF), reading, and math may be partially explained by parent-reported EF's role as a common risk and/or protective factor in reading and math (dis)abilities. The current study used a sample of 434 twin pairs (M_age = 12.12) from Florida to conduct genetically sensitive modeling on children's parent-reported EF, reading, and math skills to determine the common and unique etiological influences among the three domains. EF was measured through parent report and reading and math were measured with standardized test scores drawn from Florida's Progress Monitoring and Reporting Network as well as standardized parent-administered assessments collected by mail. Our trivariate Cholesky modeling showed that no matter which parent-reported EF component was modeled, the overlap of parent-reported EF with reading and math was explained by common genetic influences. Supplemental analysis suggested that this might in part be due to general parent report of problem behaviors. Additionally, significant environmental influences, with higher shared environmental overlap than previous work, were also found for reading and math. Findings indicate that poor parent-reported EF is a common cognitive risk factor for reading and math disabilities, which is driven by a shared genetic basis among all three domains. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Common mechanisms of executive attention underlie executive function and effortful control in children

Executive Function (EF) and Effortful Control (EC) have traditionally been viewed as distinct constructs related to cognition and temperament during development. More recently, EF and EC have been implicated in top-down self-regulation - the goal-directed control of cognition, emotion, and behavior. We propose that executive attention, a limited-capacity attentional resource subserving goal-directed cognition and behavior, is the common cognitive mechanism underlying the self-regulatory capacities captured by EF and EC. We addressed three related questions: (a) Do behavioral ratings of EF and EC represent the same self-regulation construct? (b) Is this self-regulation construct explained by a common executive attention factor as measured by performance on cognitive tasks? and (c) Does the executive attention factor explain additional variance in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) problems to behavioral ratings of self-regulation? Measures of performance on complex span, general intelligence, and response inhibition tasks were obtained from 136 preadolescent children (M = 11 years, 10 months, SD = 8 months), along with self- and parent-reported EC, and parent-reported EF, and ADHD problems. Results from structural equation modeling demonstrated that behavioral ratings of EF and EC measured the same self-regulation construct. Cognitive tasks measured a common executive attention factor that significantly explained 30% of the variance in behavioral ratings of self-regulation. Executive attention failed to significantly explain additional variance in ADHD problems beyond that explained by behavioral ratings of self-regulation. These findings raise questions about the utility of task-based cognitive measures in research and clinical assessment of self-regulation and psychopathology in developmental samples.

The Effects of Genetic and Environmental Factors on Writing Development

Researchers have identified sources of individual differences in writing across beginning and developing writers. The aim of the present study was to further clarify the sources of this variability by investigating the extent to which there are differences in genetic and environmental factors underlying the associations between lexical diversity, syntactic knowledge, and semantic cohesion knowledge in relation to writing. Differences were examined across two developmental phases of writing: beginning (i.e., elementary school) and developing (i.e., middle school). Participants included 262 twin pairs (Mage = 10.88 years) in elementary school and 247 twin pairs (Mage = 13.21 years) in middle school. Twins were drawn from the Florida Twin Project on Reading, Behavior, and Environment. Biometric models were conducted separately for subgroups defined by phase of writing development. Results indicated significant etiological differences in writing components across the two phases, such that effects associated with genes and non-shared environment were greater while effects associated with shared environment were lower in developing writers as compared to beginning writers. Furthermore, results showed that child-specific environment was the largest contributor to individual differences in writing components and their covariation for both beginning and developing writers. These results imply that even direct instruction about writing in schools may be having different effects on children based on their unique experiences.

Home Environmental and Behavioral Risk Indices for Reading Achievement

The goal of this study was to identify home environmental and temperament/behavior variables that best predict standardized reading comprehension scores among school-aged children. Data from 269 children aged 9-16 (M = 12.08; SD = 1.62) were used in discriminant function analyses to create the Home and Behavior indices. Family income was controlled in each index. The final Home and Behavior models each classified around 75% of cases correctly (reading comprehension at grade level vs. not). Each index was then used to predict other outcomes related to reading. Results showed that Home and/or Behavior accounted for 4-7% of the variance in reading fluency and spelling and 20-35% of the variance in parent-rated problems in math, social anxiety, and other dimensions. These metrics show promise as environmental and temperament/behavior risk scores that could be used to predict and potentially screen for further assessment of reading related problems.