↓ Skip to main content

Systematic Observation: Relevance of This Approach in Preschool Executive Function Assessment and Association with Later Academic Skills

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
149 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
Systematic Observation: Relevance of This Approach in Preschool Executive Function Assessment and Association with Later Academic Skills
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, December 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02031
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elena Escolano-Pérez, Maria Luisa Herrero-Nivela, Angel Blanco-Villaseñor, M. Teresa Anguera

Abstract

Executive functions (EFs) are high-level cognitive processes that allow us to coordinate our actions, thoughts, and emotions, enabling us to perform complex tasks. An increasing number of studies have highlighted the role of EFs in building a solid foundation for subsequent development and learning and shown that EFs are associated with good adjustment and academic skills. The main objective of this study was to analyze whether EF levels in 44 Spanish children in the last year of preschool were associated with levels of literacy and math skills the following year, that is, in the first year of compulsory education. We used a multi-method design, which consisted of systematic observation to observe preschool children during play and selective methodology to assess their reading, writing, and math skills in the first year of compulsory primary education. General linear modeling was used to estimate the percentage of variability in academic skills in the first year of primary school that was explained by preschool EF abilities. The results showed that preschool EF level, together with participants and the instrument used to assess academic skills, explained 99% of the variance of subsequent academic performance. Another objective was to determine whether our findings were generalizable to the reference population. To make this determination, we estimated the optimal sample size for assessing preschool EFs. To do this, we performed a generalizability analysis. The resulting generalizability coefficient showed that our sample of 44 students was sufficient for assessing preschool EFs. Therefore, our results are generalizable to the reference population. Our results are consistent with previous reports that preschool EF abilities may be associated with subsequent literacy and math skills. Early assessment of EFs may therefore contribute to identifying children who are likely to experience later learning difficulties and guide the design of suitable interventions for the optimization of EFs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 149 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 15%
Researcher 12 8%
Student > Bachelor 12 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Other 25 17%
Unknown 45 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 49 33%
Social Sciences 18 12%
Neuroscience 5 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 3%
Arts and Humanities 4 3%
Other 14 9%
Unknown 54 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 01 December 2017.
All research outputs
#18,576,001
of 23,007,887 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,476
of 30,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#325,760
of 437,912 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#465
of 546 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,887 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,246 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 437,912 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 546 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.