View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Executive Functions and Academic Performance: The Moderating Role of Distress Tolerance

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Executive Functions and Academic Performance: The Moderating Role of Distress Tolerance
Language: English
Authors: Andrés, María Laura (ORCID 0000-0003-4398-2043), Canet-Juric, Lorena (ORCID 0000-0003-4147-4889), García-Coni, Ana, Olsen, Cintia Daniela (ORCID 0000-0002-5859-8282), Vernucci, Santiago (ORCID 0000-0003-1595-3106), Galli, Juan Ignacio, Introzzi, Isabel, Richaud, María Cristina
Source: Mind, Brain, and Education. Aug 2022 16(3):197-208.
Availability: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 12
Publication Date: 2022
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Metacognition, Executive Function, Correlation, Short Term Memory, Verbal Ability, Visual Perception, Emotional Disturbances, Children, Academic Achievement, Inhibition, Task Analysis, Computer Assisted Testing, Reading Comprehension, Mathematics Skills, Measures (Individuals), Grades (Scholastic), Cognitive Ability, Resilience (Psychology)
DOI: 10.1111/mbe.12330
ISSN: 1751-2271
1751-228X
Abstract: The aim of this study was to analyze the moderating effect of distress tolerance (DT) on the relationship between executive functions and academic performance (AP). Participants were 270 children aged 9-12 years. Executive functions (EFs)--working memory (WM), inhibition, and cognitive flexibility--and DT were evaluated using computerized tasks. Direct measures of reading comprehension and mathematical calculation, as well as school grades, were used to assess AP. Results showed that verbal WM and cognitive flexibility were positively associated with reading indicators, but to a greater extent among children with medium and low DT. A positive association was found between visuospatial WM, and a mathematical indicator, to a greater extent among children with medium and low DT. The EFs did not show explanatory capacity for AP in children with high DT. These results suggest that DT could function as a "compensatory" resource.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2022
Accession Number: EJ1343668
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFw3b5eONqZ_9OVKDKSYcXvAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDCekBPbkyTQmvHIYwgIBEICBmzG5U0L8uKsQQPu7EJSRzn6LsGHS-PuizwhzluEigPoq-BdsLiWoOJpA_QDQCCf1M-yaW83iiKCPQZYXyGce-S0u3ifNivR4gU5W9rlSMavO-VXReLgBf9g91pKcOM0_-LPssSVQ1219RS-GU2H0MX9UAs_WdIUgef-WxZouIWRRBVhU4Job8wV-cNY31i6pDq3jkZepPEoQPwP7
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0158316341;[309x]01aug.22;2022Aug04.05:55;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0158316341-1">Executive Functions and Academic Performance: The Moderating Role of Distress Tolerance </title> <p>The aim of this study was to analyze the moderating effect of distress tolerance (DT) on the relationship between executive functions and academic performance (AP). Participants were 270 children aged 9–12 years. Executive functions (EFs)—working memory (WM), inhibition, and cognitive flexibility—and DT were evaluated using computerized tasks. Direct measures of reading comprehension and mathematical calculation, as well as school grades, were used to assess AP. Results showed that verbal WM and cognitive flexibility were positively associated with reading indicators, but to a greater extent among children with medium and low DT. A positive association was found between visuospatial WM, and a mathematical indicator, to a greater extent among children with medium and low DT. The EFs did not show explanatory capacity for AP in children with high DT. These results suggest that DT could function as a "compensatory" resource.</p> <p>We investigated whether children with lower memory, mental flexibility, and behavioral inhibition can perform well academically in school. Our results show that this is possible if they have a greater capacity to tolerate frustration, which shows the compensatory potential of emotional regulation skills in low cognitive abilities.</p> <p>Executive functions (EFs) are significant predictors of academic performance (AP). These functions are cognitive control processes that are involved in conflictive situations, allowing an overbearing impulse or tendency to be replaced by a more appropriate response to the situation. There is an agreement to consider working memory (WM), cognitive flexibility, and inhibition as primary executive processes (Miyake et al., 2000). WM refers to the ability to retain and process information simultaneously (Baddeley, 2012). Inhibition is a function that allows us to stop or decrease the activation of thoughts, behaviors, or emotions that tend to prevail in an overbearing manner (Nigg, 2000). Meanwhile, cognitive flexibility refers to the ability to alternate fast and effectively between thoughts and actions following specific demands (Ionescu, 2012).</p> <p>On the other hand, AP can be understood as the degree to which students achieve the objectives/goals proposed by educational systems (Steinmayr, Meibner, Weidinger, & Wirthwein, 2015); it is a significant predictor of future academic career and job opportunities (Yang, Tian, Huebner, & Zhu, 2018; Watts, 2020), later income (Watts, 2020) and quality of life (Shareef et al., 2015). According to the literature, many factors contributing to AP have been studied and several correlations have been reported between performance on EFs tasks and different standardized performance measures in both mathematics (Cragg, Keeble, Richardson, Roome, & Gilmore, 2017) and reading comprehension (Follmer, 2018). In general, these studies have shown the critical role of EFs in the emergence and development of reading and mathematics (e.g., Alloway & Alloway, 2010; Cortés Pascual, Moyano Muñoz, & Quílez Robres, 2019).</p> <p>About the relationship between EFs and AP can vary depending on affectivity and emotion regulation. Some studies show that different emotion regulation strategies and skills are associated with AP (Andrés, Stelzer, Canet‐Juric, et al., 2017; Andrés, Stelzer, Vernucci, et al., 2017). For example, Kwon, Hanrahan, and Kupzyk (2017) found that emotion regulation was positively associated with multiple aspects of academic functioning. Gross and Stright (2019) found that "exuberance" could function as a compensatory resource because highly exuberant children would have high achievement regardless of their effortful control. Recently, Kahl, Grob, and Möhring (2021) reported that knowledge of emotion regulation strategies compensates for low WM in children's and adolescents' mathematical achievement (which was not found for inhibitory skills or cognitive flexibility).</p> <p>In addition to the factors mentioned above, it is necessary to explore the existence of other emotional regulation mechanisms that could moderate the relationship between EF and AP. Some models of emotional regulation (e.g., Berking, 2000; Berking & Whitley, 2014; Gratz & Roemer, 2004) state that, in situations where stimuli cannot be modified, emotions must be accepted and tolerated to achieve efficient regulation. In this regard, one emotional regulation ability that has gained a special interest in recent years is distress tolerance (DT), which can be defined as the ability to persist in goal‐directed activities in the face of actual distress (Tonarely et al., 2020).</p> <p>The DT, as a specific mechanism of emotional regulation, has been explored in the literature mainly concerning psychopathological aspects (Zvolensky, Leyro, Bernstein, & Vujanovic, 2011). However, DT may contribute to academic learning, as the latter depends on engaging in challenging activities that are prolonged over time and may provoke negative emotions or distress (Graziano, Reavis, Keane, & Calkins, 2007). Children who have difficulty coping with these emotions are more likely to have problems concentrating, persisting, and completing school tasks (Ivcevic & Brackett, 2014). Meindl et al. (2019) found that DT predicted both grade‐point average and standardized achievement test scores as well as progress towards a college degree. Andrés, et al. (2017) and Andrés, Stelzer, Vernucci, et al. (2017) showed that DT was a significant predictor of reading comprehension of expository texts and math computation in children. Tonarely et al. (2020) found that low DT was associated with higher school anxiety in children and adolescents, which could indicate that youth who exhibit lower DT may also struggle to persist in the face of challenging academic work. This may require a greater deployment of cognitive resources and be reflected in more consistent associations with EFs.</p> <p>This study aims to analyze whether the relationship between EFs and AP varies according to the DT level and whether DT moderates the relationships between EFs and AP in fourth to sixth grade of primary school children.</p> <hd id="AN0158316341-2">MATERIALS AND METHODS</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0158316341-3">Procedure and Ethical Considerations</hd> <p>Measures were administered in two assessment sessions, during regular school hours, in quiet spaces agreed upon with each school principal. In the first session, EFs and DT measures were administered individually, using standard laptops with 14″ screens. The duration of this session was ∼30 min. In the second session, AP measures were administered in groups in the children's usual classroom. The duration of this session was ∼45 min. The Language Practices and Mathematics grades for each child were obtained from the teacher's record books.</p> <p>This study was carried out following the ethical guidelines for the Social Sciences and Humanities of the National Scientific and Technical Research Council of Argentina (CONICET, 2006). Ethical principles for research involving human subjects recommended by the Declaration of Helsinki (World Medical Association, 2013) were respected at all times. Only children whose parents/caregivers signed informed consent were able to participate in the study. In addition, children had to provide their assent. The Project was approved by the National Agency for Scientific and Technological Promotion (ANPCyT, PICT 1614/2017).</p> <hd id="AN0158316341-4">Participants</hd> <p>The initial sample consisted of 269 children (145 girls, 53.9%; 124 boys, 46.1%) aged 9–12 years (<emph>M</emph> = 11.06, <emph>SD</emph> = 0.83), recruited from two primary schools in Mar del Plata, Argentina, from fourth (<emph>n</emph> = 75, 27.9%; <emph>M</emph> age = 9.87, <emph>SD</emph> = 0.43), fifth (<emph>n</emph> = 99, 36.8%; <emph>M</emph> age = 10.91, <emph>SD</emph> = 0.44), and sixth grade (<emph>n</emph> = 95, 35.3%; <emph>M</emph> age = 11.82, <emph>SD</emph> = 0.48). That is the number of children who were authorized by their parents or guardians to participate in the research and represents 53.8% of the approximately 500 children who received the informed consent. All authorized children gave their assent.</p> <p>Complete data from 26 participants were not collected, for the following reasons: some were absent, others were taking exams or engaged in school activities at the time of the assessment, or the internet connection failed during the testing session. As a result, the final sample size was 243 (<emph>M</emph> age = 11.04; <emph>SD</emph> = 0.83; 135 girls, 55.6%; 108 boys, 44.4%).</p> <p>Recruitment was carried out through an agreement between the research group and the city school district to study cognitive, behavioral, and emotional factors in primary school children. The school district arranged access to these schools as they were willing to collaborate with the study. There were no specific incentives for participants. As for the schools, they were given feedback on the general results of the study, once obtained.</p> <p>The socioeconomic status of the children's families, based on available data from 230 children, was 19.6% low, 33% middle‐low, 25.2% middle, 19.1% middle‐high, and 3% high. Information on how this variable was assessed is detailed in the Measures, below.</p> <hd id="AN0158316341-5">Measures</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0158316341-6">Executive Functions</hd> <p>To evaluate EFs, we used a set of computerized tasks from the Cognitive Self‐regulation Tasks Battery (TAC is its acronym in Spanish; Introzzi & Canet Juric, 2019).</p> <p> <emph>WM</emph>: The task used is based on the dual paradigm (Hale, Bronik, & Fry, 1997), which requires executing a primary task in which a stimulus is maintained in short‐term memory and, at the same time, executing a secondary task that causes interference and interrupts any strategy that may facilitate the retention of information from the primary task.</p> <p>The verbal WM task consists of the gradual presentation of a series of digits of different colors. The secondary task interference occurs because the participants have to say the color of the number out loud immediately after they disappear from the screen and select them with the cursor, in the order in which they were presented.</p> <p>The visuospatial WM task consists of the presentation of a 4 × 4 matrix in which stimuli ("X") of different colors appear sequentially; in the secondary task, participants have to indicate the color of each <emph>X</emph> after they disappear from the screen, and then point to the cell in which each <emph>X</emph> had appeared in an empty matrix, in the corresponding order.</p> <p>The main performance indices of the test are, for each of the tasks, the maximum number of items recalled and the total number of correct responses. These tasks meet construct, concurrent, and external validity criteria, and acceptable levels of reliability (α = .70).</p> <p> <emph>Inhibition</emph>: The incongruent block of the TAC finger task was used to measure response inhibition based on the spatial incompatibility or Simon paradigm. In that block, a hand presented on the left or right side of the computer screen points diagonally to the opposite side with its index finger, indicating to press the contralateral key to the stimulus location ("Z" or "M" key). Therefore, the stimuli are incongruent because there is no coincidence between the site of the response and the site where the stimulus appears. The task begins with a practice block that is identical to the experimental block but shorter (8 trials). Performance in the practice block is not included in any performance indicator. Should a participant fail to achieve 80% correct responses, the practice trials are presented again until this threshold is reached.</p> <p>The experimental block comprises 20 trials (in 10 of them, the stimulus appears on the right side of the screen, and in the other 10, it appears on the left side). In both cases, the trials are distributed randomly. First, a fixation cross appears in the center of the screen and remains throughout the block; then, the stimuli are displayed sequentially, on either the right or left side of the cross and at an equal distance, with an interval of 375 ms between stimuli. Each stimulus is presented for 1,500 ms, which is the time lapse for the participant to respond. The global measures obtained in the experimental block provide information on response inhibition because the participant is forced to inhibit the natural and prepotent tendency to respond in an ipsilateral way to the stimulus, and to use a weaker but appropriate response: the contralateral response (Davidson, Amso, Anderson, & Diamond, 2006). Thus, the higher the percentage of correct answers over those given (i.e., accuracy) and the higher the reaction time (RT), the greater the inhibitory efficiency. Evidence of internal validity has been obtained for this task (Introzzi et al., 2020).</p> <p>Cognitive flexibility: The mixed block from the finger task was used. Throughout this block, which is based on a task‐switching paradigm, congruent and incongruent trials are presented in an interleaved manner. In congruent trials, a hand presented on the left or right side of the computer screen points straight down with its index finger, indicating to press the ipsilateral key to the stimulus location ("Z" or "M" key depending on the side of the finger is pointing to). In incongruent trials, a hand presented on the left or right side of the computer screen points diagonally to the opposite side with its index finger, indicating to press the contralateral key to the stimulus location ("Z" or "M" key). A central fixation cross is presented throughout the task; on each trial, a stimulus (hand pointing with the index finger) appears for 1,500 ms; the inter‐stimulus interval is 375 ms. The block is preceded by eight practice trials in which the participant must achieve 80% correct answers to move on to the task.</p> <p>The main indicator of task performance is the switch cost, which is estimated through the difference between (a) the average RT of nonswitch trials (trials with the same rule as the previous trial) and the average RT of switch trials (trials with different rule from the previous trial), and (b) the percentage of correct answers in switch trials and the percentage of correct answers on nonswitch trials. The larger the product in (a) switch cost RT and (b) switch cost accuracy, the lower the switching ability and, therefore, the cognitive flexibility. RTs and percentage of correct responses for the entire block (called overall RT and overall accuracy) are also taken as indicators, because the block is composed of two types of trials, presented in a mixed manner, thus demanding alternation. Even in trials that do not involve a rule switch with respect to the previous trial, performance is influenced by the expectation of change; that is, by the possibility that the new trial may be different from the one that precedes it (see Davidson et al., 2006). The task has shown both construct and sensitivity and specificity validity for contrasted groups (Richard's et al., 2017).</p> <hd id="AN0158316341-7">Academic Performance</hd> <p>AP was assessed using the school grades provided by the teachers from the subjects Language Practices and Mathematics, and employing standardized tests of reading comprehension and math computation.</p> <p> <emph>Reading comprehension screening assessment</emph>: It consists of a narrative text and an expository text (Abusamra, Canet‐Juric, Cartoceti, Olariaga, & Andrés, 2022, <emph>manuscript in evaluation</emph>). This screening test was designed based on the areas of the <emph>Test Leer para Comprender</emph> (TLC; Abusamra, Ferreres, Raiter, De Beni, & Cornoldi, 2010) and represents an abbreviated version of it, developed by the same authors. The TLC has been used on numerous occasions in our milieu because it fits not only the language but also the Argentine culture and context (Canet‐Juric, Galli, Zaidán, & Vázquez‐Echeverría, 2019; de Mena, 2015; Ochoa, Del Río, Mellone, & Simonetti, 2019). As such, there is no other instrument available to assess the reading comprehension of expository and narrative texts in Argentine children. While the TLC exhaustively assesses several components of text comprehension (e.g., characters, facts and sequences, inferences, text hierarchy, etc.), the screening has the advantage of covering as many areas as possible with just a few questions. The narrative text that is part of the screening is an adaptation of the short story "La estrella del fútbol" ("The soccer star"; Mariño, 1996), and the expository text is an adaptation of the text "¿Qué son las vacunas?" ("What are vaccines?"), included in Chicos de Ciencia hoy (Pellegrini, 2016). Both texts show adequate psychometric properties (α = .77).</p> <p> <emph>Arithmetic calculation sub‐test of the Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT‐3)</emph>: Written Arithmetic section of the Math Computation subtest of the WRAT‐3 (Wilkinson, 1993) was used. Items range in complexity from one‐digit addition problems to algebra problems containing different variables. The reliability and validity of the WRAT‐3 have proven to be adequate for all age groups (Snelbaker, Wilkinson, Robertson, & Glutting, 2001) as well as its internal consistency for children in our context (Vernucci, Canet Juric, Andrés, & Burín, 2017).</p> <hd id="AN0158316341-8">Distress Tolerance</hd> <p>It was assessed using the Behavioral Indicator of Resilience to Distress (Lejuez, Daughters, Danielson, & Ruggiero, 2006). This computerized task quantifies the time a participant remains on an activity which progressively increases its difficulty, to the point that having a successful execution becomes nearly impossible. A row of squares containing numbers is presented on the computer screen; participants are told that a green dot will be positioned on one of these squares, and they must perform a mouse‐click on the square where the green dot is placed before it disappears. If the square is clicked before the green dot disappears, a bird that is presented on the screen is released from its cage making a chirping sound. If the green dot disappears before the participant can click, an annoying sound is heard, and the bird remains in its cage. Every time the participant selects the correct square, 1 point is scored, while if the participant fails to select the square before the green dot disappears or selects a wrong one, no point is scored.</p> <p>The task consists of three blocks of different duration, each with variable time intervals in the presentation of the green points. The first block has a duration of 3 min, with intervals of 5 s between the presentation of each green point. If the participant responds correctly, the interval is reduced by 0.5 s, if not it is increased by 0.5 s. The second block has a duration of 5 min. During the first 4 min, the intervals between each green dot presentation are the average of the intervals of the first block, while during the last minute; the time interval is halved, making it very difficult for the participant to give correct responses. After the second block, participants have a short break and the third block is introduced. It has a maximum duration of 5 min, and the interval between each green point is the same as in the final minute of the second block. Unlike the previous blocks, an "exit" button is presented on the screen, and participants are told that they can click that button if they wish to abandon the task. The DT is operationalized as the persistence time (in milliseconds) in the third block. This task has been used with children in our context, showing adequate validity (Andrés, Stelzer, Canet Juric, et al., 2017; Andrés, Stelzer, Vernucci, et al., 2017).</p> <hd id="AN0158316341-9">Socioeconomic Status</hd> <p>A brief semi‐structured survey requesting occupational and educational data of the families was sent and completed by the children's parents/caregivers. It provides data on the highest education level and type of occupation of the primary income earner. This information is classified using a scale based on the Argentinian education system (Pascual, Galperín, & Bornstein, 1993) and the EGO‐70 Occupational Prestige Scale for Argentina (Sautú, 1989), to then calculate the socioeconomic status of families through the Hollingshead Index (Hollingshead, 2011). This procedure has been used in previous studies in the local context (e.g., Andrés, Stelzer, Canet Juric, et al., 2017; Andrés, Stelzer, Vernucci, et al., 2017; Vernucci et al., 2017).</p> <hd id="AN0158316341-10">Statistical Analysis</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0158316341-11">Assumptions and Preliminary Data Screening</hd> <p>Descriptive analyses (means, standard deviations) of the variables under study were carried out. Skewness and kurtosis were computed based on Kline's (2011) recommendation, and no deviations from normality were detected (see Table 1).</p> <p>1 TableDescriptive Statistics of the Variables Under Study</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th align="left" /><th /><th align="center">M</th><th align="center">SD</th><th align="center">Skewness</th><th align="center">Kurtosis</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td valign="top">Verbal WM</td><td>Span</td><td>2.88</td><td>  0.92</td><td>−0.78</td><td>1.66</td></tr><tr><td>Correct trials</td><td>  5.29</td><td>  2.06</td><td>−0.09</td><td>−0.21</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Visuospatial WM</td><td>Span</td><td>  2.05</td><td>  1.62</td><td>−0.02</td><td>−1.12</td></tr><tr><td>Correct trials</td><td>  3.69</td><td>  3.04</td><td>0.55</td><td>−0.30</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Inhibition</td><td>Accuracy</td><td> 82.82</td><td> 25.01</td><td>−2.23</td><td>4.25</td></tr><tr><td>RT (in ms)</td><td>723</td><td>199</td><td>−1.93</td><td>5.62</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Cognitive flexibility</td><td>Switch cost—Accuracy</td><td>  7.19</td><td> 10.66</td><td>−0.22</td><td>1.10</td></tr><tr><td>Switch cost—RT (in ms)</td><td>101</td><td>58</td><td>0.43</td><td>−0.32</td></tr><tr><td>Overall Accuracy</td><td> 87.65</td><td> 12.79</td><td>−1.93</td><td>3.71</td></tr><tr><td>Overall RT (in ms)</td><td>908</td><td>127</td><td>0.01</td><td>0.64</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Reading</td><td>Narrative text comprehension</td><td>  9.26</td><td>  2.34</td><td>−0.29</td><td>−0.68</td></tr><tr><td>Expository text comprehension</td><td>  8.04</td><td>  2.49</td><td>−0.42</td><td>−0.28</td></tr><tr><td>LP grades—third trimester</td><td>  8.05</td><td>  1.15</td><td>0.16</td><td>−1.02</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Math</td><td>Math computation (WRAT)</td><td> 13.72</td><td>  3.10</td><td>0.10</td><td>−0.18</td></tr><tr><td>Math grades—third trimester</td><td>  7.73</td><td>  1.18</td><td>0.27</td><td>−0.73</td></tr><tr><td>Distress tolerance</td><td>Duration Block 3 BIRD task (in s)</td><td>200.5</td><td> 96.5</td><td>−0.35</td><td>−1.32</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 <emph>Note</emph>: LP = language practices; RT = reaction time; WM = working memory.</p> <hd id="AN0158316341-12">Moderation Analysis</hd> <p>The moderating variable was created from standard deviations (+1<emph>SD</emph> = high DT; between +1<emph>SD</emph> and −1<emph>SD</emph> = medium DT; −1<emph>SD</emph> = low DT; Warner, 2013). For the moderation analyses, the procedure of interaction analysis with quantitative variables in multiple regression was used. First, the predictor variables (performance indices of the EFs tasks and the duration indicator in block 3 in the DT task) were centered and then multiplied to create the term representing the interaction. In the models, the control variables (age and socioeconomic status), then the variables referring to task performance in EFs and DT, and finally the interaction between EFs and DT (with their values previously centered) were introduced as independent variables. As dependent variables, the different AP indicators were placed. If the term representing the interaction—and introduced in the equation—turns out to be significant, a moderation effect can be assumed (Warner, 2013). Several interaction analyses were carried out (one analysis for each EFs indicator combined with each AP indicator). To determine the direction of the regression slope in the values of the moderator variable—when the interaction was significant—additional regression analyses were performed introducing the control variables, DT and EFs indicators as independent variables, and the AP indicator as a dependent variable at each of the levels of the moderating variable.</p> <hd id="AN0158316341-13">RESULTS</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0158316341-14">Preliminary Analysis</hd> <p>The moderating variable (DT) is represented by three groups: Low DT (Female = 60.7%; Male = 39.3%; <emph>M</emph> age = 11.05, <emph>SD</emph> = 0.88); Medium DT (Female = 54.3%; Male = 45.7%; <emph>M</emph> age = 10.97, <emph>SD</emph> = 0.75) and High DT (Female = 53.3%; Male = 45.7%; <emph>M</emph> age = 11.14, <emph>SD</emph> = 0.88). These groups (levels) do not present significant differences by age <emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref1">2</reflink>, 193) = 0.633, <emph>p</emph> = .532) or by gender (χ<sups>2</sups> = 2.05, <emph>p</emph> = .562). Table 2 shows the descriptive statistics of the three levels of DT.</p> <p>2 TableDescriptive Statistics of the DT Levels</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th align="center">DT levels</th><th align="center">M</th><th align="center">SD</th><th align="center">Skewness</th><th align="center">Kurtosis</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td valign="top">Low (N = 53)</td><td valign="top">Verbal WM</td><td>Span</td><td>2.87</td><td>  1.17</td><td>−1.11</td><td> 1.14</td></tr><tr><td>Correct trials</td><td>  5.35</td><td>  2.28</td><td>−0.25</td><td>−0.18</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Visuospatial WM</td><td>Span</td><td>  1.71</td><td>  1.55</td><td>0.04</td><td>−1.48</td></tr><tr><td>Correct trials</td><td>  3.25</td><td>  2.84</td><td>0.40</td><td>−1.02</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Inhibition</td><td>Accuracy</td><td> 83.48</td><td> 23.29</td><td>−2.14</td><td> 4.69</td></tr><tr><td>RT (in ms)</td><td>765</td><td>204</td><td>−1.77</td><td> 5.58</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Cognitive flexibility</td><td>Overall RT (in ms)</td><td>923</td><td>114</td><td>−0.54</td><td> 0.38</td></tr><tr><td>Overall accuracy</td><td> 88.50</td><td>  9.80</td><td>−1.42</td><td> 1.82</td></tr><tr><td>Switch cost—Accuracy</td><td>  5.59</td><td> 12.77</td><td>−0.86</td><td> 1.60</td></tr><tr><td>Switch cost—RT (in ms)</td><td>98</td><td>65</td><td>0.39</td><td>−0.71</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Reading</td><td>Narrative text comprehension</td><td>  8.77</td><td>  2.49</td><td>−0.43</td><td>−0.80</td></tr><tr><td>Expository text comprehension</td><td>  7.56</td><td>  2.55</td><td>−0.12</td><td>−0.61</td></tr><tr><td>LP grades—third trimester</td><td>  7.73</td><td>  1.19</td><td>0.62</td><td>−0.50</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Math</td><td>Math computation (WRAT)</td><td> 13.15</td><td>  3.49</td><td>0.13</td><td>−0.65</td></tr><tr><td>Math grades—third trimester</td><td>  7.71</td><td>  1.18</td><td>0.53</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Medium (N = 101)</td><td valign="top">Verbal WM</td><td>Span</td><td>2.86</td><td>   .80</td><td>0.04</td><td> 0.80</td></tr><tr><td>Correct trials</td><td>  5.28</td><td>  1.91</td><td>0.20</td><td>−0.22</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Visuospatial WM</td><td>Span</td><td>  2.04</td><td>  1.60</td><td>−0.15</td><td>−1.30</td></tr><tr><td>Correct trials</td><td>  3.68</td><td>  2.89</td><td>0.34</td><td>−0.72</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Inhibition</td><td>Accuracy</td><td> 80.74</td><td> 27.82</td><td>−2.08</td><td> 3.13</td></tr><tr><td>RT (in ms)</td><td>702</td><td>205</td><td>−2.18</td><td> 5.65</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Cognitive flexibility</td><td>Overall RT (in ms)</td><td>903</td><td>125</td><td>−0.16</td><td>−0.30</td></tr><tr><td>Overall accuracy</td><td> 87.01</td><td> 13.14</td><td>−1.81</td><td> 3.08</td></tr><tr><td>Switch cost—Accuracy</td><td>  7.53</td><td> 10.53</td><td>0.27</td><td> 0.33</td></tr><tr><td>Switch cost—RT (in ms)</td><td>106</td><td>102</td><td>5.70</td><td>46.36</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Reading</td><td>Narrative text comprehension</td><td>  9.11</td><td>  2.61</td><td>−0.56</td><td>−0.39</td></tr><tr><td>Expository text comprehension</td><td>  7.97</td><td>  2.57</td><td>−0.56</td><td>−0.17</td></tr><tr><td>LP grades—third trimester</td><td>  8.01</td><td>  1.18</td><td>0.02</td><td>−1.00</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Math</td><td>Math computation (WRAT)</td><td> 13.20</td><td>  2.99</td><td>0.05</td><td>−0.37</td></tr><tr><td>Math grades—third trimester</td><td>  7.94</td><td>  1.19</td><td>0.01</td><td>−0.65</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">High (N = 89)</td><td valign="top">Verbal WM</td><td>Span</td><td>  2.92</td><td>   .90</td><td>−0.91</td><td> 2.12</td></tr><tr><td>Correct trials</td><td>  5.26</td><td>  2.14</td><td>−0.10</td><td>−0.43</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Visuospatial WM</td><td>Span</td><td>  2.18</td><td>  1.69</td><td>0.00</td><td>−1.11</td></tr><tr><td>Correct trials</td><td>  3.88</td><td>  3.33</td><td>0.67</td><td>−0.17</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Inhibition</td><td>Accuracy</td><td> 85.50</td><td> 22.42</td><td>−2.61</td><td> 6.62</td></tr><tr><td>RT (in ms)</td><td>714</td><td>179</td><td>−1.80</td><td> 6.98</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Cognitive flexibility</td><td>Overall RT (in ms)</td><td>886</td><td>129</td><td>−0.06</td><td>−0.31</td></tr><tr><td>Overall Accuracy</td><td> 88.13</td><td> 13.62</td><td>−2.13</td><td> 4.56</td></tr><tr><td>Switch cost—Accuracy</td><td>  6.93</td><td>  9.45</td><td>0.09</td><td>−0.09</td></tr><tr><td>Switch cost—RT (in ms)</td><td>104</td><td>55</td><td>0.40</td><td>−0.25</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Reading</td><td>Narrative text comprehension</td><td>  9.16</td><td>  2.36</td><td>−0.30</td><td>−0.44</td></tr><tr><td>Expository text comprehension</td><td>  7.90</td><td>  2.45</td><td>−0.51</td><td> 0.02</td></tr><tr><td>LP grades—third trimester</td><td>  8.13</td><td>  1.10</td><td>0.09</td><td>−0.85</td></tr><tr><td valign="top">Math</td><td>Math computation (WRAT)</td><td> 13.94</td><td>  3.40</td><td>−0.08</td><td> 0.08</td></tr><tr><td>Math grades—third trimester</td><td>  7.91</td><td>  1.094</td><td>0.23</td><td>−0.84</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>2 <emph>Note</emph>: LP = language practices; RT = reaction time; WM = working memory.</p> <p>Correlations between all the variables under study, and partial correlations controlling for age, are presented in Table 3.</p> <p>3 TableCorrelations Between All Variables Under Study</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th align="left" /><th align="center">1</th><th align="center">2</th><th align="center">3</th><th align="center">4</th><th align="center">5</th><th align="center">6</th><th align="center">7</th><th align="center">8</th><th align="center">9</th><th align="center">10</th><th align="center">11</th><th align="center">12</th><th align="center">13</th><th align="center">14</th><th align="center">15</th><th align="center">16</th><th align="center">17</th><th align="center">18</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td>1. Age</td><td align="center">—</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>2. Social status</td><td>0.00</td><td align="center">—</td><td> .08</td><td> .10</td><td> .14</td><td>.16<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td> .03</td><td> .02</td><td>−.02</td><td>−.02</td><td> .14</td><td>−.05</td><td>−.01</td><td> .11</td><td> .04</td><td>.25<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td> .14</td><td>.22<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td></tr><tr><td>3. Verbal WM span</td><td>.11</td><td> .08</td><td align="center">—</td><td>.91<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.21<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>.22<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>.15<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>−.13</td><td>−.08</td><td> .07</td><td> .10</td><td>−.11</td><td> .01</td><td>.17<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>.16<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>.23<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.27<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.23<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td></tr><tr><td>4. Verbal WM correct trials</td><td>.16<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td> .10</td><td>.91<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td align="center">—</td><td>.26<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.28<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td> .11</td><td>−.14<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>−.09</td><td> .09</td><td> .09</td><td>−.13</td><td>−.05</td><td>.17<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>.19<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>.29<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.29<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.27<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td></tr><tr><td>5. Visuospatial WM span</td><td>.19<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>.14<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>.23<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.28<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td align="center">—</td><td>.95<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td> .08</td><td>−.10</td><td>−.03</td><td> .13</td><td> .07</td><td>−.07</td><td> .06</td><td>.14<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td> .12</td><td>.18<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>.32<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.15<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td></tr><tr><td>6. Visuospatial WM correct trials</td><td>.19<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>.16<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>.24<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.30<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.95<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td align="center">—</td><td> .08</td><td>−.12</td><td> .00</td><td> .09</td><td> .08</td><td>−.10</td><td> .04</td><td>.16<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td> .13</td><td>.17<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>.31<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.14<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td></tr><tr><td>7. Inhibition accuracy</td><td>.09</td><td> .03</td><td>.15<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>.12<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td> .09</td><td> .10</td><td align="center">—</td><td>.56<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td> .03</td><td> .04</td><td>.27<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>−.09</td><td> .03</td><td> .12</td><td>−.07</td><td> .12</td><td> .05</td><td>.15<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td></tr><tr><td>8. Inhibition RT</td><td>−.05</td><td> .02</td><td>−.13<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>−.15<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>−.11</td><td>−.13<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>.55<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td align="center">—</td><td>−.03</td><td> .02</td><td>.16<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>.29<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>−.09</td><td>−.04</td><td>−.16<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>−.06</td><td>−.19<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>−.01</td></tr><tr><td>9. Cognitive flexibility switch cost—accuracy</td><td>−.08</td><td>−.02</td><td>−.09</td><td>−.10</td><td>−.05</td><td>−.01</td><td> .02</td><td>−.03</td><td align="center">—</td><td> .03</td><td> .00</td><td> .00</td><td> .06</td><td> .06</td><td> .02</td><td>−.05</td><td> .04</td><td>−.03</td></tr><tr><td>10. Cognitive flexibility switch cost—RT</td><td>.07</td><td>−.02</td><td> .08</td><td> .10</td><td>.14<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td> .10</td><td> .05</td><td> .02</td><td> .03</td><td align="center">—</td><td>−.13</td><td>.35<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td> .00</td><td> .06</td><td> .06</td><td> .11</td><td>.16<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td> .13</td></tr><tr><td>11. Cognitive flexibility overall accuracy</td><td>.16<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>.14<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td> .12</td><td> .11</td><td> .10</td><td> .11</td><td>.28<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.15<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>−.01</td><td>−.12</td><td align="center">—</td><td> .06</td><td> .04</td><td> .14</td><td> .13</td><td> .12</td><td> .08</td><td> .10</td></tr><tr><td>12. Cognitive flexibility overall RT</td><td>−.20<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>−.05</td><td>−.13<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>−.15<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>−.11</td><td>−.13<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>−.11</td><td>.29<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td> .02</td><td>.33<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td> .03</td><td align="center">—</td><td>−.07</td><td>−.05</td><td> .07</td><td>−.01</td><td>−.04</td><td>−.02</td></tr><tr><td>13. Duration Block 3 BIRD task (in ms)</td><td>.07</td><td>−.01</td><td> .02</td><td>−.03</td><td> .08</td><td> .05</td><td> .03</td><td>−.10</td><td> .06</td><td> .01</td><td> .05</td><td>−.09</td><td align="center">—</td><td> .09</td><td> .06</td><td>.15<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td> .09</td><td> .06</td></tr><tr><td>14. Narrative text comprehension</td><td>.34<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td> .10</td><td>.19<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>.22<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.19<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>.21<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.15<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>−.05</td><td> .03</td><td> .07</td><td>.18<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>−.11</td><td> .11</td><td align="center">—</td><td>.48<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.38<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.33<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.32<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td></tr><tr><td>15. Expository text comprehension</td><td>.35<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td> .04</td><td>.19<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>.23<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.18<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>.19<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>−.03</td><td>−.17<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>−.01</td><td> .08</td><td>.18<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>−.01</td><td> .08</td><td>.54<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td align="center">—</td><td>.38<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.26<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>.28<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td></tr><tr><td>16. LP grades—third trimester</td><td>.22<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>.25<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.24<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.31<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.22<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.20<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.13<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>−.07</td><td>−.07</td><td> .12</td><td>.15<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>−.06</td><td>.16<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>.42<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.43<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td align="center">—</td><td>.55<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.81<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td></tr><tr><td>17. Math computation (WRAT)</td><td>.28<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td> .13</td><td>.29<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.32<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.35<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.35<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td> .07</td><td>−.19<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td> .02</td><td>.17<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td> .12</td><td>−.09</td><td> .10</td><td>.39<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.33<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.58<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td align="center">—</td><td>.51<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td></tr><tr><td>18. Math grades—third trimester</td><td>.14<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>.22<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.24<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.28<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.18<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn5" /></td><td>.16<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>.16<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td>−.01</td><td>−.04</td><td>.14<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn4" /></td><td> .12</td><td>−.05</td><td> .07</td><td>.35<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.31<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.81<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td>.52<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn6" /></td><td align="center">—</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <ulist> <item>3 <emph>Note</emph>: Partial correlations controlling for age are presented in the upper triangle. LP = language practices; RT = reaction time; WM = working memory.</item> <item>4 * <emph>p</emph> < .05.</item> <item>5 ** <emph>p</emph> < .01.</item> <item>6 *** <emph>p</emph> < .001.</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0158316341-15">DT, EFs, and Reading Performance</hd> <p>The DT moderated the relationship between EFs and reading performance in the following indices (Table 4, Figure 1).</p> <p>4 TableHierarchical Regression Analyses for Executive Function, Distress Tolerance, Interaction Predicting Reading Achievement, and Simple Slopes Analysis Per Level of DT</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th align="left">EF</th><th>IV</th><th align="center">ß</th><th>Reading achievement</th><th>Low DT</th><th>Medium DT</th><th>High DT</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td valign="top">Verbal WM</td><td>Age</td><td>.22<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn9" /></td><td valign="top">School grades in LPR<sup>2</sup> = .17; F(<sub>5</sub>) = 7.94; p < .001</td><td>.40<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn8" /></td><td>.24<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn8" /></td><td>−.03</td></tr><tr><td>Social status</td><td>.24<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn10" /></td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Span</td><td>.15<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn8" /></td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>DT</td><td>.16<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn8" /></td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Span × DT</td><td>−.18<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn8" /></td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Age</td><td>.19<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn9" /></td><td valign="top">School grades in LPR<sup>2</sup> = .18; F(<sub>5</sub>) = 8.96; p < .001</td><td>.47<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn9" /></td><td>.24<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn8" /></td><td>.12</td></tr><tr><td>Social status</td><td>.23<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn9" /></td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Correct trials</td><td>.27<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn10" /></td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>DT</td><td>.15<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn8" /></td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Correct trials × DT</td><td>−.12<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn11" /></td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td valign="top">Cognitive flexibility</td><td>Age</td><td>.28<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn10" /></td><td valign="top">Narrative text comprehensionR<sup>2</sup> = 14; F(<sub>5</sub>) = 6.81; p < .001</td><td>.37<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn8" /></td><td>.21</td><td>.04</td></tr><tr><td>Social status</td><td> .07</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Overall accuracy</td><td>.15<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn8" /></td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>DT</td><td> .11</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Overall accuracy × DT</td><td>−.15<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn8" /></td><td /><td /><td /></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <ulist> <item>7 <emph>Note</emph>: DT = distress tolerance; EF = executive function; LP = language practices; RT = reaction time; WM = working memory.</item> <item>8 * <emph>p</emph> < .05.</item> <item>9 ** <emph>p</emph> < .01.</item> <item>10 *** <emph>p</emph> < .001.</item> <item>11 † <emph>p</emph> < .10.</item> </ulist> <p> <img src="https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/img/embimages/rdk/309X/01aug22/mbe12330-fig-0001.jpg?ephost1=dGJyMNXb4kSepq84yOvqOLCmsE6epq5Srqa4SK6WxWXS" alt="mbe12330-fig-0001.jpg" title="1 Moderating effect of the level of distress tolerance on the relationship between executive functions, academic performance, and accounting for control variables (age and socioeconomic status). Scores are unstandardized residuals. Lines represent the slope of each executive function by the level of distress tolerance. DT = distress tolerance; WM = working memory." /> </p> <p></p> <hd id="AN0158316341-17">Working Memory</hd> <p>The verbal WM span interacted with DT to explain the Language Practices grades in the third trimester (ß = −.15, <emph>p</emph> < .05). A similar interaction—but with marginal significance—was observed for the number of correct trials in the verbal WM task (ß = −.12, <emph>p</emph> = .06). Subsequent regression analyses showed that the explanatory power of these indices on school grades is positive, that is, the greater the span and number of correct trials, the better the reading performance. This is observed only for children with low and medium DT (span: ß = .39, <emph>p</emph> < .01; ß = .24, <emph>p</emph> < .05; a number of correct trials: ß = .47, <emph>p</emph> < .01; ß = .24, <emph>p</emph> < .05). In the high DT group, these associations were not significant. However, for verbal WM span, three cases with standardized residuals greater than 3 were detected, so analyses</p> <p>were performed again excluding these outliers. The results remain the same and are reported—without outliers—in Table 4 and Figure 1A (span) and Figure 1B (correct trials).</p> <hd id="AN0158316341-18">Inhibition</hd> <p>No interaction effects were observed between the inhibition and DT indicators on any of the reading performance variables.</p> <hd id="AN0158316341-19">Cognitive Flexibility</hd> <p>An interaction between overall accuracy and DT on reading comprehension of narrative texts was observed (ß = −.15, <emph>p</emph> < .05). The analyses performed to determine the regression slope in the different values of the moderator variable showed that the predictive capacity of the overall accuracy (ß = .33, <emph>p</emph> < .05) on reading comprehension of narrative texts was positive, and it was observed only for children with low DT. Medium and high DT groups did not show significant associations. However, three cases with standardized residuals greater than 3 were detected, so analyses were performed again excluding these outliers. The results remain the same and are reported—without outliers—in Table 4 and Figure 1C.</p> <hd id="AN0158316341-20">DT, EFs, and Mathematics Performance</hd> <p>The DT moderated the relationship between EFs and mathematics performance in the following performance indices (Table 5).</p> <p>5 TableHierarchical Regression Analyses for Executive Function, Distress Tolerance, Interaction Predicting Math Achievement, and Simple Slopes Analysis Per Level of DT</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead valign="bottom"><tr><th align="left">EF</th><th>IV</th><th align="center">ß</th><th>Math achievement</th><th>Low DT</th><th>Medium DT</th><th>High DT</th></tr></thead><tbody valign="top"><tr><td valign="top">Visuospatial WM</td><td>Age</td><td>.19<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn13" /></td><td valign="top">Math computationR<sup>2</sup> = .18; F(<sub>5</sub>) = 6.15; p < .001</td><td>.59<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn13" /></td><td>.37<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn14" /></td><td>.21</td></tr><tr><td>Social status</td><td> .01</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Correct trials</td><td>.35<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn15" /></td><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /><td align="char" char="." /></tr><tr><td>DT</td><td> .03</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Correct trials × DT</td><td>−.17<xref ref-type="fn" rid="tfn13" /></td><td /><td /><td /></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <ulist> <item>12 <emph>Note</emph>: DT = distress tolerance; EF = executive function; WM = working memory.</item> <item>13 * <emph>p</emph> < .05.</item> <item>14 ** <emph>p</emph> < .01.</item> <item>15 *** <emph>p</emph> < .001.</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0158316341-21">Working Memory</hd> <p>The number of correct trials in the visuospatial WM task interacted with DT to explain math computation (ß = −.17; <emph>p</emph> < .05). Subsequent regression analyses show that the explanatory capacity of this index on math computation is positive, that is, the greater the number of correct trials, the better the math performance, and it is only observed for children with low and medium DT (low: ß = .59, <emph>p</emph> < .05; medium: ß = .37, <emph>p</emph> < .01). In children with high DT, this association was not significant (see Figure 1D).</p> <hd id="AN0158316341-22">Inhibition</hd> <p>Initially, RT in the inhibition task interacted with DT to explain math computation performance (ß = .20; <emph>p</emph> < .05). Additional regression analyses indicated that children with shorter RT had higher scores in math computation, but only among those with low DT (ß = −.39; <emph>p</emph> < .05). In children with medium and high DT, this association was not significant. However, seven cases with standardized residuals greater than 3 were detected, so analyses were performed again excluding these outliers. While there is a significant interaction between RT and math computation with the full sample, it becomes non‐significant when outliers are excluded (ß = −.12; <emph>p</emph> = .183). Thus, DT did not moderate the relationship between inhibition and any of the math achievement variables.</p> <hd id="AN0158316341-23">Cognitive Flexibility</hd> <p>No interaction effects were observed between cognitive flexibility and DT indicators on any of the math achievement variables.</p> <hd id="AN0158316341-24">DISCUSSION</hd> <p>This study aimed to analyze whether the relationship between EFs and AP varies according to the DT level in children from fourth to sixth grade (aged 9–12). Overall, the results showed that DT is a moderating factor in the relationship between EFs and AP, in the sense that EFs positively predicted AP but only among children with low or moderate DT. In children with high DT, on the other hand, EFs did not predict AP.</p> <p>Results showed that performance in the various executive functioning indicators presented associations with AP measures, both in mathematics and reading comprehension.</p> <p>Our results are in accordance with previous studies that demonstrate a consistent relationship between these processes and different measures of AP. However, our results contribute to the current knowledge by extending the understanding of the moderating role of DT on the relationship between WM, cognitive flexibility and inhibition, and AP.</p> <p>Specifically, the moderating effect of DT was observed in the relationship between verbal WM (i.e., span and correct trials) and Language Practices grades, as well as in the relationship between cognitive flexibility (overall accuracy) and reading comprehension of narrative texts. According to Follmer (2018), among others, verbal WM and cognitive flexibility are related to reading performance. Our results indicate that this relationship is especially consistent in children with low and/or moderate DT and that these EFs have no explanatory power over reading performance among children with high DT.</p> <p>Regarding math performance, DT showed a moderating effect on the relationship between visuospatial WM (i.e., number of correct answers) and mathematical computation. As reported, for example, by Fanari, Meloni, and Massidda (2019), these EFs are related to math learning. Our results show—similarly to what occurs with reading performance—that this relationship is consistent in children with low and/or moderate DT but disappears in children with high DT. This is in line with Kahl et al. (2021) in the sense that emotion regulation compensates for low WM on mathematical achievement. These results indicate that children with low or average DT may make an effort to persist in school tasks, as has been recently proposed by other authors (i.e., Tonarely et al., 2020), and that this would demand, as a consequence, greater recruitment of EFs. Medium and low DT children may experience a greater conflict between the urge to abandon situations or tasks they dislike/find unpleasant (e.g., homework) and the objectives or goals to be reached (e.g., academic achievement), therefore recruiting EFs to a greater extent to resolve this conflict and comply with school demands. Individual differences in children's EFs would then be associated with their AP; that is, those with better executive performance would obtain better academic results and vice versa.</p> <p>On the contrary, children with high DT can perform well academically, regardless of their EFs levels, which supports Gross and Stright's (2019) and Kahl et al. (2021) proposal about the existence of specific affective compensatory resources in the face of low levels of executive processes.</p> <p>Finally, these results highlight the importance of the so‐called "soft" skills, understood as transversal personal competencies that facilitate a subject's performance in various contexts (Cimatti, 2016), especially in DT. This emotional regulation ability, traditionally linked to psychopathology (e.g., Daughters et al., 2009), has recently been considered as also heavily implicated in the achievement of academic goals (e.g., Andrés, Stelzer, Canet Juric, et al., 2017; Andrés, Stelzer, Vernucci, et al., 2017; Meindl et al., 2019; Tonarely et al., 2020), and our results are in support of that.</p> <p>One of the limitations of our study is its cross‐sectional design. Knowledge of the interaction between DT and EFs on AP would profit from longitudinal studies that could analyze its effects over time. Also, AP has been assessed exclusively using grades and standardized tests and only in terms of performance in reading and mathematics. Future studies should include teachers' reports, together with other academic skills that could provide representative information on AP, complementary to performance tasks.</p> <p>In summary, our results show that the relationship between EFs and AP varies based on school‐age children's DT level, mainly showing that high DT may compensate for the low performance of EFs in the achievement of academic goals. These results imply the need to carry out comprehensive assessments of children's abilities to anticipate possible AP difficulties. Although EFs are consistent predictors of performance in reading and mathematics during school age, the results of this study suggest that researchers need to consider interactions with other variables, such as DT. Thus, the possibility of identifying those children who may have difficulties in school performance should not be based exclusively on performance on cognitive tasks but should incorporate measurements of variables such as DT that moderate the relationship between EFs and AP.</p> <p>In addition, the results of this study could contribute to developing interventions on EFs with the aim of obtaining a far transfer to AP. Given that DT moderates the relationship between EFs and AP, considering the level of DT together with that of the EFs being trained could lead to better outcomes. Taking into consideration the existing controversies regarding the far transfer of EFs training—especially to the academic domain—(e.g., Kassai, Futo, Demetrovics, & Takacs, 2019; Sala & Gobet, 2020), these results suggest that it would be potentially more beneficial to focus on training not only on children with a lower level of EFs (Traut, Guild, & Munakata, 2021) but also with lower DT. Therefore, the relationship between these constructs could continue to be studied by assessing whether DT acts as a moderator of the benefits obtained from EF interventions.</p> <hd id="AN0158316341-25">Conflict of Interest</hd> <p>The authors have stated explicitly that there are no conflicts of interest in connection with this article.</p> <ref id="AN0158316341-26"> <title> REFERENCES </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Abusamra, V., Canet‐Juric, L., Cartoceti, R., Olariaga, Y., & Andrés, M.L. (2022) Baremos de screening de evaluación de la comprensión lectora para 4° y 5° grado [Reading comprehension assessment screening scales for 4th and 5th grade] (Manuscript in evaluation)</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref1" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Abusamra, V., Ferreres, A., Raiter, A., De Beni, R., & Cornoldi, C. (2010). Test leer Para Comprender (TLC). Evaluación de la comprensión de textos [Read to Understand Test (TLC). Evaluation of the texts comprenhension]. Paidós.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Alloway, T. P., & Alloway, R. G. (2010). Investigating the predictive roles of working memory and IQ in academic attainment. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 106 (1), 20 – 29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2009.11.003</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Andrés, M. L., Stelzer, F., Canet Juric, L. C., Introzzi, I., Rodríguez‐Carvajal, R., & Guzmán, J. I. N. (2017). Emotion regulation and academic performance: A systematic review of empirical relatioships. Psicologia Em Estudo, 22 (3), 299 – 311.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Andrés, M. L., Stelzer, F., Vernucci, S., Canet Juric, L., Galli, J. I., & Navarro Guzmán, J. I. (2017). Regulación emocional y habilidades académicas: relación en niños de 9 a 11 años de edad [Emotional regulation and academic skills: correlation in children 9‐11 years of age.]. Suma Psicológica, 24 (2), 79 – 86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sumpsi.2017.07.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Baddeley, A. (2012). Working memory: Theories, models, and controversies. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 1 – 29.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Berking, M., & Whitley, B. (2014) Affect regulation training. New York, NY : Springer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Canet‐Juric, L., Galli, J. I., Zaidán, C., & Vázquez‐Echeverría, A. (2019). Autocontrol y desempeño escolar en lengua y matemática. Investigaciones en Psicología, 24 (1), 35 – 42.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Cimatti, B. (2016). Definition, development, assessment of soft skills and their role for the quality of organizations and enterprises. International Journal for quality research, 10 (1), 97 – 130. https://doi.org/10.18421/IJQR10.01‐05</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (2006) Lineamientos para el comportamiento ético en las ciencias sociales y humanidades (Resolución 2857/06) [Guidelines for ethical behavior in the social sciences and humanities (Resolution 2857/06)]. Buenos Aires, Argentina : Ministerio de Educación, Ciencia y Tecnología. Retrieved from <ulink href="http://www.conicet.gov.ar/wp‐content/uploads/RD‐20061211‐2857.pdf">http://www.conicet.gov.ar/wp‐content/uploads/RD‐20061211‐2857.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cortés Pascual, A., Moyano Muñoz, N., & Quílez Robres, A. (2019). The relationship between executive functions and academic performance in primary education: Review and meta‐analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1582. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01582</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cragg, L., Keeble, S., Richardson, S., Roome, H. E., & Gilmore, C. (2017). Direct and indirect influences of executive functions on mathematics achievement. Cognition, 162, 12 – 26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2017.01.014</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Daughters, S. B., Reynolds, E. K., MacPherson, L., Kahler, C. W., Danielson, C. K., Zvolensky, M., & Lejuez, C. W. (2009). Distress tolerance and early adolescent externalizing and internalizing symptoms: The moderating role of gender and ethnicity. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 47 (3), 198 – 205.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Davidson, M., Amso, D., Anderson, L., & Diamond, A. (2006). Development of cognitive control and executive functions from 4 to 13 years. Neuropsychologia, 44 (11), 20 – 37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.02.006</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> de Mena, C. (2015). Comprensión de textos y la habilidad inferencial. Exlibris, 4, 396 – 404.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fanari, R., Meloni, C., & Massidda, D. (2019). Visual and spatial working memory abilities predict early math skills: A longitudinal study. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2460.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Follmer, D. J. (2018). Executive function and Reading comprehension: A meta‐analytic review. Educational Psychologist, 53 (1), 42 – 60. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2017.1309295</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gratz, K. L., & Roemer, L. (2004). Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation and dysregulation: Development, factor structure, and initial validation of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 26 (1), 41 – 54. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOBA.0000007455.08539.94</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Graziano, P. A., Reavis, R. D., Keane, S. P., & Calkins, S. D. (2007). The role of emotion regulation in children's early academic success. Journal of School Psychology, 45 (1), 3 – 19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.09.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gross, R. A., & Stright, A. D. (2019). Does exuberance moderate the relation between effortful control at 54 months and first‐grade achievement? Interaction of a reg & temperament dimension. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 48, 295 – 302.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hale, S., Bronik, M., & Fry, A. (1997). Verbal and spatial working memory in school‐age children: Developmental differences in susceptibility to interference. Developmental Psychology, 33 (2), 364 – 371.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hollingshead, A. B. (2011). Four factor index of social status. Yale Journal Of Sociology, 8, 21 – 52.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Introzzi, I. & Canet Juric, L. (2019). TAC: Tareas de Autorregulación Cognitiva. [TAC: Cognitive Self‐Regulation Tasks]. https://tac.com.ar/evaluacion/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Introzzi, I., Richard's, M. M., García Coni, A., Aydmune, Y., Stelzer, F., Canet Juric, L., ... Navarro‐Pardo, E. (2020). Global versus controlled functioning throughout the stages of development. Symmetry, 12, 1952. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12121952</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ionescu, T. (2012). Exploring the nature of cognitive flexibility. New Ideas in Psychology, 30 (2), 190 – 200.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ivcevic, Z., & Brackett, M. (2014). Predicting school success: Comparing conscientiousness, grit and emotion regulation ability. Journal of Research in Personality, 52, 29 – 36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.06.005</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kahl, T., Grob, A., & Möhring, W. (2021). Does emotion regulation compensate deficits in various executive functions in children's and adolescents' mathematical achievement? Learning and Individual Differences, 89, 102034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102034</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kassai, R., Futo, J., Demetrovics, Z., & Takacs, Z. K. (2019). A meta‐analysis of the experimental evidence on the near‐ and far‐transfer effects among children's executive function skills. Psychological Bulletin, 145 (2), 165 – 188. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000180</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kline, R. B. (2011) Methodology in the social sciences. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. (3rd ed.). New York : Guilford Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kwon, K., Hanrahan, A. R., & Kupzyk, K. A. (2017). Emotional expressivity and emotion regulation: Relation to academic functioning among elementary school children. School Psychology Quarterly, 32 (1), 75 – 88. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000166</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lejuez, C. W., Daughters, S. B., Danielson, C. W., & Ruggiero, K. (2006). The behavioral indicator of resiliency to distress (BIRD). Unpublished manual.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mariño, R. (1996) La estrella delfútbol. Leemos un cuento.Garrapiñadas 1. AZ. <ulink href="http://bibliopequeitinerante.blogspot.com/2012/10/cuento‐la‐estrella‐del‐futbol‐de.html">http://bibliopequeitinerante.blogspot.com/2012/10/cuento‐la‐estrella‐del‐futbol‐de.html</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Meindl, P., Yu, A., Galla, B. M., Quirk, A., Haeck, C., Goyer, J. P., ... Duckworth, A. L. (2019). A brief behavioral measure of frustration tolerance predicts academic achievement immediately and two years later. Emotion, 19 (6), 1081 – 1092. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000492</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex "frontal lobe" tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41 (1), 49 – 100. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nigg, J. T. (2000). On inhibition/disinhibition in developmental psychopathology: Views from cognitive and personality psychology and a working inhibition taxonomy. Psychological Bulletin, 126 (2), 220 – 246.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ochoa, E. M., Del Río, N. E., Mellone, C., & Simonetti, C. E. (2019). Eficacia de un programa de mejora de la comprensión lectora en educación primaria. Revista de Psicología y Educación, 1 (14), 63 – 73.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pascual, L., Galperín, C. Z., & Bornstein, M. H. (1993). La medición del nivel socioeconómico y la psicología evolutiva: el caso argentino [Measurement of socioeconomic status and evolutionary psychology: the Argentine case]. Revista Interamericana de Psicología, 27 (1), 59 – 74.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pellegrini, J. (2016). ¿Qué son las vacunas? Chicos de ciencia hoy. https://<ulink href="http://www.chicosdecienciahoy.org.ar/que‐son‐las‐vacunas">www.chicosdecienciahoy.org.ar/que‐son‐las‐vacunas</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Richard's, M., Vernucci, S., Zamora, E., Canet Juric, L., Introzzi, I., & Guardia, J. (2017). Contribuciones empíricas Para la validez de grupos contrastados de la Batería de Tareas de Autorregulación Cognitiva (TAC) [Empirical contributions to the validity of contrasted groups of the battery of cognitive self‐regulation tasks (TAC)]. Interdisciplinaria, 34 (1), 173 – 192.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sala, G., & Gobet, F. (2020). Working memory training in typically developing children: A multilevel meta‐analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 27 (3), 423 – 434. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423‐019‐01681‐y</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sautú, R. (1989) Teoría y técnica en la medición del status ocupacional: Escalas objetivas de Prestigio. (Documento de trabajo) [Theory and technique in the measurement of occupational status: Prestige objective scales. (Work document)]. Buenos Aires: UBA, Instituto de Ciencias Sociales. Buenos Aires.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shareef, M. A., AlAmodi, A. A., Al‐Khateeb, A. A., Abudan, Z., Alkhani, M. A., Zebian, S. I., Tabrizi, M. J. (2015). The interplay between academic performance and quality of life among preclinical students. BMC medical education, 15 (1), 1 – 8.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Snelbaker, A. J., Wilkinson, G. S., Robertson, G. J., & Glutting, J. J. (2001). Wide range achievement test 3 (WRAT 3). In W. I. Dorfman, & M. Hersen (Eds.), Perspectives on individual differences. Understanding psychological assessment. (pp. 259 – 274). Boston, MA : Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978‐1‐4615‐1185‐4_13</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Steinmayr, R., Meibner, A., Weidinger, A. & Wirthwein, L. (2015). Academic achievement. Oxford Bibliographies.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tonarely, N. A., Hirlemann, A., Shaw, A. M., LoCurto, J., Souer, H., Ginsburg, G. S., & Ehrenreich‐May, J. (2020). Validation and clinical correlates of the behavioral indicator of resiliency to distress task (BIRD) in a university‐ and community‐based sample of youth with emotional disorders. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 42 (4), 787 – 798. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862‐020‐09830‐7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Traut, H. J., Guild, R. M., & Munakata, Y. (2021). Why does cognitive training yield inconsistent benefits? A meta‐analysis of individual differences in baseline cognitive abilities and training outcomes. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 662139. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.662139</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vernucci, S., Canet Juric, L., Andrés, M. L., & Burín, D. (2017). Comprensión lectora y cálculo matemático: el rol de la memoria de trabajo en niños de edad escolar. Psykhe, 26 (2), 1 – 13. https://doi.org/10.7764/psykhe.26.2.1047</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Warner, R. M. (2013). Moderation: Tests for interaction in multiple regression. In R. M. Warner (Ed.), Applied statistics: From bivariate through multivariate techniques. (Vol. 2, 2nd ed., pp. 611 – 644). Washington D.C. : Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Watts, T. W. (2020). Academic achievement and economic attainment: Reexamining associations between test scores and long‐run earnings. AERA Open, 6 (2), 116. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858420928985</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wilkinson, G. (1993) Wide range achievement test 3. Wilmington, DE : Wide Range, Inc.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> World Medical Association. (2013). Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Retrieved from https://<ulink href="http://www.wma.net/policies‐post/wma‐declaration‐of‐helsinki‐ethical‐principles‐for‐medical‐research‐involving‐human‐subjects/">www.wma.net/policies‐post/wma‐declaration‐of‐helsinki‐ethical‐principles‐for‐medical‐research‐involving‐human‐subjects/</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yang, Q., Tian, L., Huebner, E. S., & Zhu, X. (2018). Relations among academic achievement, self‐esteem, and subjective well‐being in school among elementary school students: A longitudinal mediation model. School Psychology, 34 (3), 328 – 340.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zvolensky, M. J., Leyro, T. M., Bernstein, A., & Vujanovic, A. A. (2011). Historical perspectives, theory, and measurement of distress tolerance. In M. J. Zvolensky, A. Bernstein & A. A. Vujanovic (Eds.), Distress tolerance. (pp. 3 – 27). New York, NY : The Guilford Press.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By María Laura Andrés; Lorena Canet‐Juric; Ana García‐Coni; Cintia Daniela Olsen; Santiago Vernucci; Juan Ignacio Galli; Isabel Introzzi and María Cristina Richaud</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1343668
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Executive Functions and Academic Performance: The Moderating Role of Distress Tolerance
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Andrés%2C+María+Laura%22">Andrés, María Laura</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4398-2043">0000-0003-4398-2043</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Canet-Juric%2C+Lorena%22">Canet-Juric, Lorena</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4147-4889">0000-0003-4147-4889</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22García-Coni%2C+Ana%22">García-Coni, Ana</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Olsen%2C+Cintia+Daniela%22">Olsen, Cintia Daniela</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5859-8282">0000-0002-5859-8282</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Vernucci%2C+Santiago%22">Vernucci, Santiago</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1595-3106">0000-0003-1595-3106</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Galli%2C+Juan+Ignacio%22">Galli, Juan Ignacio</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Introzzi%2C+Isabel%22">Introzzi, Isabel</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Richaud%2C+María+Cristina%22">Richaud, María Cristina</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Mind%2C+Brain%2C+and+Education%22"><i>Mind, Brain, and Education</i></searchLink>. Aug 2022 16(3):197-208.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 12
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2022
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Metacognition%22">Metacognition</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Executive+Function%22">Executive Function</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Correlation%22">Correlation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Short+Term+Memory%22">Short Term Memory</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Verbal+Ability%22">Verbal Ability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Visual+Perception%22">Visual Perception</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Emotional+Disturbances%22">Emotional Disturbances</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Children%22">Children</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Academic+Achievement%22">Academic Achievement</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Inhibition%22">Inhibition</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Task+Analysis%22">Task Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Computer+Assisted+Testing%22">Computer Assisted Testing</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Reading+Comprehension%22">Reading Comprehension</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Mathematics+Skills%22">Mathematics Skills</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Measures+%28Individuals%29%22">Measures (Individuals)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Grades+%28Scholastic%29%22">Grades (Scholastic)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cognitive+Ability%22">Cognitive Ability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Resilience+%28Psychology%29%22">Resilience (Psychology)</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1111/mbe.12330
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1751-2271<br />1751-228X
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: The aim of this study was to analyze the moderating effect of distress tolerance (DT) on the relationship between executive functions and academic performance (AP). Participants were 270 children aged 9-12 years. Executive functions (EFs)--working memory (WM), inhibition, and cognitive flexibility--and DT were evaluated using computerized tasks. Direct measures of reading comprehension and mathematical calculation, as well as school grades, were used to assess AP. Results showed that verbal WM and cognitive flexibility were positively associated with reading indicators, but to a greater extent among children with medium and low DT. A positive association was found between visuospatial WM, and a mathematical indicator, to a greater extent among children with medium and low DT. The EFs did not show explanatory capacity for AP in children with high DT. These results suggest that DT could function as a "compensatory" resource.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2022
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1343668
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1343668
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1111/mbe.12330
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 12
        StartPage: 197
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Metacognition
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Executive Function
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Correlation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Short Term Memory
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Verbal Ability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Visual Perception
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Emotional Disturbances
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Children
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Academic Achievement
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Inhibition
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Task Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Computer Assisted Testing
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Reading Comprehension
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Mathematics Skills
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Measures (Individuals)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Grades (Scholastic)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cognitive Ability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Resilience (Psychology)
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Executive Functions and Academic Performance: The Moderating Role of Distress Tolerance
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Andrés, María Laura
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Canet-Juric, Lorena
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: García-Coni, Ana
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Olsen, Cintia Daniela
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Vernucci, Santiago
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Galli, Juan Ignacio
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Introzzi, Isabel
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Richaud, María Cristina
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 08
              Type: published
              Y: 2022
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1751-2271
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1751-228X
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 16
            – Type: issue
              Value: 3
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Mind, Brain, and Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1