↓ Skip to main content

Self-report measures of executive functioning are a determinant of academic performance in first-year students at a university of applied sciences

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
157 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Self-report measures of executive functioning are a determinant of academic performance in first-year students at a university of applied sciences
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01131
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria A. E. Baars, Marije Nije Bijvank, Geertje H. Tonnaer, Jelle Jolles

Abstract

Recent studies in late adolescents (age 17+) show that brain development may proceed till around the 25th year of age. This implies that study performance in higher education could be dependent upon the stage of brain maturation and neuropsychological development. Individual differences in development of neuropsychological skills may thus have a substantial influence on the outcome of the educational process. This hypothesis was evaluated in a large survey of 1760 first-year students at a University of Applied Sciences, of which 1332 are included in the current analyses. This was because of their fit within the age range we pre-set (17-20 years' old at start of studies). Student characteristics and three behavioral ratings of executive functioning (EF) were evaluated with regard to their influence on academic performance. Self-report measures were used: self-reported attention, planning, and self-control and self-monitoring. Results showed that students with better self-reported EF at the start of the first year of their studies obtained more study credits at the end of that year than students with a lower EF self-rating. The correlation between self-control and self-monitoring on the one hand, and study progress on the other, appeared to differ for male and female students and to be influenced by the level of prior education. The results of this large-scale study could have practical relevance. The profound individual differences between students may at least partly be a consequence of their stage of development as an adolescent. Students who show lower levels of attention control, planning, and self-control/self-monitoring can be expected to have a problem in study planning and study progress monitoring and hence study progress. The findings imply that interventions directed at the training of these (executive) functions should be developed and used in higher education in order to improve academic achievement, learning attitude, and motivation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 157 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 155 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 17%
Student > Master 19 12%
Researcher 17 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 9%
Student > Bachelor 11 7%
Other 26 17%
Unknown 43 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 59 38%
Social Sciences 14 9%
Neuroscience 12 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 4%
Arts and Humanities 3 2%
Other 13 8%
Unknown 50 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 April 2017.
All research outputs
#6,281,762
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#9,067
of 29,762 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,755
of 264,146 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#192
of 547 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,762 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,146 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 547 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.