↓ Skip to main content

History of Childhood Maltreatment and College Academic Outcomes: Indirect Effects of Hot Execution Function

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
119 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
History of Childhood Maltreatment and College Academic Outcomes: Indirect Effects of Hot Execution Function
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01091
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marilyn C. Welsh, Eric Peterson, Molly M. Jameson

Abstract

College students who report a history of childhood maltreatment may be at risk for poor outcomes. In the current study, we conducted an exploratory analysis to examine potential models that statistically mediate associations between aspects of maltreatment and aspects of academic outcome, with a particular focus on executive functions (EF). Consistent with contemporary EF research, we distinguished between relatively "cool" EF tasks (i.e., performed in a context relatively free of emotional or motivational valence) and "hot" EF tasks that emphasize performance under more emotionally arousing conditions. Sixty-one male and female college undergraduates self-reported childhood maltreatment history (emotional abuse and neglect, physical abuse and neglect, and sexual abuse) on the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ), and were given two EF measures: (1) Go-No-Go (GNG) test that included a Color Condition (cool); Neutral Face Condition (warm); and Emotion Face condition (hot), and (2) Iowa Gambling Task (IGT), a measure of risky decision making that reflects hot EF. Academic outcomes were: (1) grade point average (GPA: first-semester, cumulative, and semester concurrent with testing), and (2) Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire (SACQ). Correlational patterns suggested two EF scores as potential mediators: GNG reaction time (RT) in the Neutral Face condition, and IGT Block 2 adaptive responding. Indirect effects analyses indicated that IGT Block 2 adaptive responding has an indirect effect on the relationship between CTQ Total score and 1st semester GPA, and between CTQ Emotional Abuse and concurrent GPA. Regarding college adaptation, we identified a consistent indirect effect of GNG Neutral Face RT on the relationship between CTQ Emotional Neglect and SACQ total, academic, social, and personal-emotional adaption scores. Our results demonstrate that higher scores on a child maltreatment history self-report negatively predict college academic outcomes as assessed by GPA and by self-reported adaptation. Further, relatively "hot" EF task performance on the IGT and GNG tasks serves as a link between child maltreatment experiences and college achievement and adaptation, suggesting that hot EF skills may be a fruitful direction for future intervention efforts to improve academic outcomes for this population.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 119 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 13%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Researcher 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 15 13%
Unknown 42 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 43 36%
Social Sciences 9 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 3%
Neuroscience 4 3%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 46 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 05 July 2017.
All research outputs
#14,067,995
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#14,270
of 30,161 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,497
of 313,296 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#353
of 591 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,161 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 50% 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 313,296 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 591 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.