View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

The Parent-Report Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI) in Italian Preschoolers: Factor Structure, Reliability, and Criterion Validity

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The Parent-Report Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI) in Italian Preschoolers: Factor Structure, Reliability, and Criterion Validity
Language: English
Authors: Mara Morelli (ORCID 0000-0003-3463-3685), Matilde Brunetti (ORCID 0000-0003-2809-6908), Antonio Chirumbolo (ORCID 0000-0002-4274-2489), Pietro Spataro (ORCID 0000-0003-3204-4449), Fiorenzo Laghi (ORCID 0000-0003-3969-4292), Emiddia Longobardi (ORCID 0000-0002-0997-0623)
Source: European Journal of Developmental Psychology. 2024 21(2):293-304.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 12
Publication Date: 2024
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Foreign Countries, Preschool Children, Cognitive Measurement, Executive Function, Factor Structure, Test Reliability, Predictive Validity, Factor Analysis, Short Term Memory, Inhibition, Rating Scales, Cognitive Ability
Geographic Terms: Italy
Assessment and Survey Identifiers: Rothbart Infant Behavior Questionnaire
DOI: 10.1080/17405629.2024.2315770
ISSN: 1740-5629
1740-5610
Abstract: Executive functions (EFs) are a set of high-level cognitive processes that enable children to perform a goal-directed behaviour. During the preschool years, EFs undergo significant developmental changes. Therefore, it is crucial to have reliable measures that accurately evaluate preschoolers' EFs in preschool-aged children. The present study aimed to investigate the factor structure of the Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI), replicating the expected two-factor model in Italian preschoolers. A total of 210 Italian parents completed an online survey on their children aged between 36 and 72 months (Mage = 54.12; SDage = 11.22; 44.3% girls). A confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the two-factor model of the CHEXI (working memory and inhibition) for Italian preschoolers, also demonstrating the invariance of the model across gender and age. Furthermore, the criterion validity of the CHEXI was established by examining correlations with the Children's Behavior Questionnaire. The present study provides evidence that the CHEXI is a valid and reliable rating measure for assessing EFs abilities of Italian preschoolers.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2024
Accession Number: EJ1422758
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFk8o0Ae6kBmBAfeptPCkcpAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDIEh5FB8gis9oVsKxgIBEICBmwCTS5N5B3bKgqnuELoFJOJZKTfhL9TMgqeeez_ZmqprLV1-LHGrMayFICkv58vGiZPGNydCuOyqIT3fTwfszy2QVC1LrKa8mP6IF-ceEf0r-gaaB1Z8HWbXph1cpxO44lq9H6tmdXIrzd-dX5MYd0HMDUNT5H4pd_C_Kte0MSTdjA4CuskVvWcz35U3Q_KW7Qmn-9w0ytYXsw6m
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0176845691;a9o01mar.24;2024Apr29.05:54;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0176845691-1">The parent-report Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI) in Italian preschoolers: factor structure, reliability, and criterion validity </title> <p>Executive functions (EFs) are a set of high-level cognitive processes that enable children to perform a goal-directed behaviour. During the preschool years, EFs undergo significant developmental changes. Therefore, it is crucial to have reliable measures that accurately evaluate preschoolers' EFs in preschool-aged children. The present study aimed to investigate the factor structure of the Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI), replicating the expected two-factor model in Italian preschoolers. A total of 210 Italian parents completed an online survey on their children aged between 36 and 72 months (Mage = 54.12; SDage = 11.22; 44.3% girls). A confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the two-factor model of the CHEXI (working memory and inhibition) for Italian preschoolers, also demonstrating the invariance of the model across gender and age. Furthermore, the criterion validity of the CHEXI was established by examining correlations with the Children's Behavior Questionnaire. The present study provides evidence that the CHEXI is a valid and reliable rating measure for assessing EFs abilities of Italian preschoolers.</p> <p>Keywords: Executive functions; CHEXI; preschoolers; rating measures; parent-report</p> <hd id="AN0176845691-2">Introduction</hd> <p>Executive functions (EFs), defined as a set of high-level cognitive processes that enable children to perform a goal-directed behaviour (Diamond, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref1">4</reflink>]) – working memory, inhibitory control, and shifting – but the first two are considered the most common ones (Catale et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref2">3</reflink>]). However, these processes are related to each other (Diamond, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref3">4</reflink>]).</p> <p>Preschool age is a crucial stage during which EFs undergo many developmental changes (Miyake & Friedman, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref4">18</reflink>]). Thus, it is important having valid measures that provide an accurate evaluation of preschoolers' EFs, which are critical in children's development because they are related to several positive outcomes, such as school readiness and success, mental and physical health, quality life, and job success (Diamond, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref5">4</reflink>]).</p> <p>EFs can be measured through two distinct methods that captured different levels of cognition (Toplak et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref6">23</reflink>]): performance-based measures that detect the efficiency of cognitive process, or ratings measures that evaluate the success in goal pursuit. The interest of researchers and educators towards rating measures of EFs is not related to the intention to replace performance-based measures but to their ecological validity (Camerota et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref7">2</reflink>]; Isquith et al., [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref8">10</reflink>]). Rating measures, widely used in recent research (e.g., Longobardi et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref9">14</reflink>]), allow to detect a child's goal-directed behaviour in a range of meaningful daily-life situations in which EFs are needed to display appropriate reactions (Toplak et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref10">23</reflink>]).</p> <p>Among the rating measures for EFs in preschool age, the most commonly used ones are the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function for Preschoolers (BRIEF-P; Gioia et al., [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref11">6</reflink>]; Italian adaptation by Marano et al., [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref12">15</reflink>]), and the Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI; Thorell & Nyberg, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref13">22</reflink>]). The BRIEF-P is a parent-report composed of 63 items that measures preschoolers' EFs difficulties at home or in preschool context. It includes items assessing both EFs and ADHD symptoms. Therefore, if it shows a correlation with ADHD symptoms, it does not necessarily imply that it is a reliable predictor of ADHD. This is because the BRIEF questionnaire (i.e., the predictor) "is almost identical to the outcome variable (i.e., the ratings of the ADHD symptoms"; Thorell & Nyberg, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref14">22</reflink>], p. 538). The CHEXI (Thorell & Nyberg, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref15">22</reflink>]) is a 24-items questionnaire that assesses EFs difficulties and previous validation studies showed a two-factor structure as a best parsimonious fitting model to the data: working memory and inhibition (e.g., Camerota et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref16">2</reflink>]). The CHEXI has been validated with typically developing preschoolers in various countries, including Spain with 4–5-year-old children (Giménez et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref17">5</reflink>]), Sweden with 5-year-old children (Thorell & Nyberg, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref18">22</reflink>]), the U.S.A. with 3–5-year-old children (Camerota et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref19">2</reflink>]), and Turkey with 4–6-year-old children (Hamamci et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref20">8</reflink>]). The CHEXI demonstrated weak correlations with EFs tasks (Camerota et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref21">2</reflink>]; Giménez et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref22">5</reflink>]; Thorell & Nyberg, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref23">22</reflink>]). Unlike the BRIEF, which is sensitive to deficits in EFs across various diagnostic groups, the CHEXI allows for the detection of EFs in real-life situations, rather than focusing on items specifically related to ADHD criteria (Thorell & Nyberg, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref24">22</reflink>]). Other validation studies of the CHEXI have been conducted in different countries also on school-age samples: one study confirmed the two factors structure of the CHEXI in Iran with 6–12-year-old typically developing and ADHD children (Mashhadi et al., [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref25">16</reflink>]), in Belgium with 8–11-year-old typically developing and ADHD children (Catale et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref26">3</reflink>]), in Kenya with 6–11-year-old typically developing children (Amukune & Józsa, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref27">1</reflink>]), and in Argentina with 6–11-year-old typically developing children (Gutierrez et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref28">7</reflink>]). Both the study by Mashhadi et al. ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref29">16</reflink>]) and by Catale et al. ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref30">3</reflink>]) found the CHEXI a valid screening measure for ADHD, while Amukune and Józsa ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref31">1</reflink>]) and Gutierrez et al. ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref32">7</reflink>]) found EFs difficulties measured with the CHEXI to be correlated with academic achievement. Mashhadi et al. ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref33">16</reflink>]) also confirmed the convergent validity between CHEXI and an already measure of EFs deficits. All these studies found a two factors structure of the CHEXI. There is only one study focused on the Brazilian validation of the CHEXI in 4–7-year-old children by Trevisan et al. ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref34">24</reflink>]) that found a unique factor.</p> <p>Previous studies confirmed the validity of the CHEXI in detecting preschoolers' difficulties in EFs, its relevance for neuropsychology, and educational fields, and the reliability of the two factors (Camerota et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref35">2</reflink>]). Several studies established the efficacy of the CHEXI in discriminating between typically developing and ADHD children, demonstrating the relevance of the CHEXI as a valid screening measure for preschoolers' EFs difficulties (Catale et al., [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref36">3</reflink>]; Mashhadi et al., [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref37">16</reflink>]).</p> <p>To our knowledge, no studies analysed the factor structure of the parent-form of the CHEXI for Italian preschoolers. Therefore, the present study aimed to investigate the factor structure of the CHEXI running an explorative and confirmatory factor analysis, to replicate the expected two-factor structure in the Italian population. The study also tested the invariance of the model across gender and age. Furthermore, following the same procedure of previous studies (e.g., Hamamci et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref38">8</reflink>]), the criterion validity was investigated running correlations between CHEXI factors (working memory and inhibition) and the Child Behaviors Questionnaire's subscales (attentional focusing, impulsivity, inhibitory control; Putnam & Rothbart, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref39">19</reflink>]). Finally, gender and age differences in the CHEXI scores are presented.</p> <hd id="AN0176845691-3">Methods</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0176845691-4">Participants</hd> <p>A total of 210 Italian parents from different parts of Italy (<emph>M</emph><subs><emph>age</emph></subs> = 37.48; <emph>SD</emph><subs><emph>age</emph></subs> = 6.11; 201 mothers) of healthy and typically developing preschoolers (no child had sensory, intellectual, or speech deficits) aged between 36 and 72 months (<emph>M</emph><subs><emph>age</emph></subs> = 54.12; <emph>SD</emph><subs><emph>age</emph></subs> = 11.22; 93 girls) completed a set of questionnaires. Parents were recruited in different kindergarten schools. Most parents (62.4%) reported a medium socio-economic status. Regarding the parents' education level, 45.7% had a high-school diploma, 38.1% had a university degree, and 10.5% had a post-degree specialization. The degree breakdown of the present sample was in line with the typical breakdown for Italian adults (ISTAT, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref40">11</reflink>]). Written informed consent was obtained from parents and school authorities. The study was approved by the ethical committee of the Department of Dynamic and Clinical Psychology, and Health Studies of the Sapienza University of Rome.</p> <hd id="AN0176845691-5">Instruments</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0176845691-6">Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI)</hd> <p>The CHEXI (Thorell & Nyberg, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref41">22</reflink>]) is a 24-item parent-report questionnaire rated on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (<emph>completely disagree</emph>) to 5 (<emph>completely agree</emph>). In this study, the Italian version freely available on the CHEXI's website was used (<ulink href="http://www.chexi.se">www.chexi.se</ulink>). The original items were translated in Italian, following a translation and back-translation procedure. The CHEXI evaluates the preschoolers' EFs skills, specifically investigating two factors, working memory (WM) and inhibition (INH) that showed good reliability in the original work by Thorell and Nyberg ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref42">22</reflink>]). Higher scores indicate EFs' difficulties.</p> <hd id="AN0176845691-7">Children's Behavior Questionnaire-short form (CBQ)</hd> <p>The subscales of attentional focusing (6 items), impulsivity (6 items), and inhibitory control (6 items) of the Italian version of the CBQ (Putnam & Rothbart, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref43">19</reflink>]; Italian adaptation by Matricardi et al., [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref44">17</reflink>]) was administered. Each item was rated on a 7-point Likert scale from 1 (<emph>extremely untrue</emph>) to 7 (<emph>extremely true</emph>). Each scale showed moderately acceptable reliabilities from.62 to.67.</p> <hd id="AN0176845691-8">Data analysis</hd> <p>To check if the items were adequate for running the factor analysis the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) index was used. An explorative factor analysis using principal axis factoring (PAF) with Oblimin rotation tested the factorial structure of the Italian CHEXI. Following the procedure of Thorell and Nyberg ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref45">22</reflink>]) in their original work on the validation of the CHEXI, factors loadings greater than.40 were considered a cut off criterion for each item to be retained. The reliability of each factor is reported. Moreover, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was run to confirm the adequacy of fit to the data of the two factors model (WM and INH; Thorell & Nyberg, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref46">22</reflink>]), employing a parcelling strategy (e.g., Little et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref47">12</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref48">13</reflink>]), comprising two latent variables with four parcels each. The maximum likelihood method was used. Model fit was evaluated with the following indices: (a) the Comparative Fit Index (CFI); (b) the Tucker – Lewis index (TLI); (c) the root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA); (d) and the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR). In general, a good fit for TLI and CFI are values above 0.95, for RMSEA and SRMR are values smaller/equal than 0.08 (Hu & Bentler, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref49">9</reflink>]).</p> <p>Then, a multi-group analysis tested the invariance of the two-factor model across age (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref50">3</reflink>, 4, 5 years) and gender (boys and girls) by comparing a sequence of increasingly restricted factor models (configural, metric, and scalar invariance). To verify the invariance of the model the chi-square differences between configural and metric and between scalar and configural were computed. If the chi-square was not significant, the model was confirmed to be invariant across gender and age.</p> <p>Moreover, a set of Multivariate Analyses of Variance (MANOVAs) tested gender and age differences in the two CHEXI dimensions. Mean scores and standard deviations, also divided by age and gender groups, were provided. Finally, to test criterion validity, correlations between the CHEXI and the dimensions of the CBQ (i.e, attention focusing, impulsivity, and inhibitory control) were computed. All the analyses were conducted using Jamovi 2.3.18.</p> <hd id="AN0176845691-9">Results</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0176845691-10">Explorative factor analysis of CHEXI</hd> <p>The KMO index was high at.84, and the score on Bartlett's Test of Sphericity was significant, χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib120" id="ref51">120</reflink>) = 1301, <emph>p</emph> <.001. Therefore, the data was reliable and suitable for factor analysis. The PAF with Oblimin rotation was conducted on the original 24 items of the CHEXI using the software JAMOVI 2.3.18. Both scree-plot and eigenvalue greater than 1 suggested a two-factor solution, accounting for 37.1% of the total variance (first six eigenvalues: 7.66, 1.06, 0.64, 0.47, 0.37, 0.24). Factor loadings lower than.40 and item 22 ('Acts in a wilder way compared to other children in a group: at a birthday party or during a group activity') that did not load on the pertinent factor were excluded from the analyses. Afterwards, the EFA was performed again on the remaining 16 items, and both scree-plot and eigenvalue suggested a two-factor solution, accounting for 41.7% of the total variance (first six eigenvalues: 5.49, 0.98, 0.29, 0,22, 0.19, 0.12). The items and factor loadings of the CHEXI are reported in Table 1. The first factor (WM, 8 items) accounted for the 21.6% of the variance with factor loadings ranging from.45 to.79 (mean factor loading of.61). The second factor (INH, 8 items) accounted for 20.1% of the variance with factor loadings ranging from.47 to.77 (mean factor loading of.59). The two factors were modestly and positively correlated, <emph>r</emph> =.59. Both factors and the total CHEXI score showed good reliabilities: Cronbach's alpha of.84 for WM,.84 for INH, and.89 for the total, McDonald's ω of.84 for WM,.84 for INH, and.89 for the total, and composite reliability of.83 for WM and.81 for INH.</p> <p>Table 1. Factor loadings of Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI) in Italian preschoolers.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td>Factors loadings</td></tr><tr><td /><td>Working Memory</td><td>Inhibition</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>13 (20). Has difficulty with task or activities that involve several steps</td><td>0.791</td><td /></tr><tr><td>12 (19). Has difficulty understanding verbal instructions unless he/she is also shown <italic>how</italic> to do something</td><td>0.694</td><td /></tr><tr><td>6 (12). Has difficulty planning for an activity (e.g., remembering to bring everything necessary for a field trip or things needed for school)</td><td>0.690</td><td /></tr><tr><td>14 (21). Has difficulty thinking ahead or learning from experience</td><td>0.607</td><td /></tr><tr><td>8 (14). Has difficulty carrying out activities that require several steps (e.g., for younger children, getting completely dressed without reminders; for older children, doing all homework independently)</td><td>0.601</td><td /></tr><tr><td>10 (17). Has difficulty telling a story about something that has happened so that others may easily understand</td><td>0.561</td><td /></tr><tr><td>16 (24). Has difficulty keeping things in mind while he/she is doing something else</td><td>0.494</td><td /></tr><tr><td>15 (23). Has difficulty doing things that require mental effort, such as counting backwards</td><td>0.455</td><td /></tr><tr><td>4 (8). When something needs to be done, he/she is often distracted by something more appealing</td><td /><td>0.770</td></tr><tr><td>2 (4). Has difficulty following through on less appealing tasks unless he/she is promised some type of reward for doing so</td><td /><td>0.762</td></tr><tr><td>9 (15). In order to be able to concentrate, he/she must find the task appealing</td><td /><td>0.729</td></tr><tr><td>5 (11). Has clear difficulties doing things he/she finds boring</td><td /><td>0.543</td></tr><tr><td>1 (2). Seldom seems to be able to motivate him-/herself to do something that he/she doesn't want to do</td><td /><td>0.478</td></tr><tr><td>7 (13). Has difficulty holding back his/her activity despite being told to do so</td><td /><td>0.476</td></tr><tr><td>3 (5). Has a tendency to do things without first thinking about what could happen</td><td /><td>0.473</td></tr><tr><td>11 (18). Has difficulty stopping an activity immediately upon being told to do so. For example, he/she needs to jump a couple of extra times or play on the computer a little bit longer after being asked to stop</td><td /><td>0.470</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 The original order number of the scale of 24 items by Thorell and Nyberg ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref52">22</reflink>]) is reported between brackets.</p> <hd id="AN0176845691-11">Confirmatory factor analysis and model invariance across gender and age</hd> <p>The CFA confirmed the adequacy of fit to the data of a two-factor model (WM and INH), previously found in other countries. The model had a good fit on the Italian sample of preschoolers as indicated by the chi-square test, χ<sups>2</sups>(<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref53">19</reflink>) = 51, <emph>p</emph> <.001, and the goodness-of-fit indexes, CFI = 0.96, TLI = 0.94, RMSEA = 0.08, SRMR = 0.036. Moreover, the multi-group analyses confirmed that the two-factor model was robust and invariant both across gender and age (Table 2).</p> <p>Table 2. Model's invariance across gender (boys vs. girls) and age (3,4,5 years old).</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td>χ<sup>2</sup></td><td>df</td><td><italic>p</italic></td><td>CFI</td><td>TLI</td><td>RMSEA</td><td>SRMR</td><td>Δ χ<sup>2</sup></td><td>Δ<italic>df</italic></td><td><italic>p</italic></td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><italic>Model Invariance (Gender)</italic></td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>M1_Configural</td><td>70</td><td>38</td><td>.001</td><td>.96</td><td>.94</td><td>.09</td><td>.047</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>M2_Metric</td><td>74.3</td><td>44</td><td>.003</td><td>.96</td><td>.95</td><td>.08</td><td>.06</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>M3_Scalar</td><td>76.3</td><td>44</td><td>.002</td><td>.96</td><td>.95</td><td>.08</td><td>.05</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td><italic>Model Invariance (Age)</italic></td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>M4_Configural</td><td>88.7</td><td>57</td><td>.005</td><td>.96</td><td>.94</td><td>.08</td><td>.04</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>M5_Metric</td><td>95.7</td><td>69</td><td>.019</td><td>.96</td><td>.96</td><td>.07</td><td>.06</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>M6_Scalar</td><td>105</td><td>69</td><td>.003</td><td>.95</td><td>.94</td><td>.08</td><td>.05</td><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td><italic>Models Comparison</italic></td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>M2-M1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td>4.3</td><td>6</td><td>.64</td></tr><tr><td>M3-M1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td>6.3</td><td>6</td><td>.39</td></tr><tr><td>M5-M4</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td>7</td><td>12</td><td>.85</td></tr><tr><td>M6-M4</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td>19.3</td><td>12</td><td>.08</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>2 CFI= comparative fit index; TLI = Tucker – Lewis index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual.</p> <hd id="AN0176845691-12">Gender and age differences</hd> <p>The first MANOVA displayed a significant multivariate effect, Wilks' Lambda =.97, <emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref54">2</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib207" id="ref55">207</reflink>) = 3,285, <emph>p</emph> =.03, showing that boys had higher scores on INH and on the CHEXI total score than girls. As regards age differences, the second MANOVA did not find any significant multivariate effect, Wilks' Lambda =.97, <emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref56">4</reflink>,<reflink idref="bib412" id="ref57">412</reflink>) = 1.29, <emph>p</emph> =.27, showing no significant differences among preschoolers of 3, 4, and 5 years in the CHEXI scores (see Table 3 for MANOVA's statistics).</p> <p>Table 3. Means, standard deviations and F-values on CHEXI dimensions and total score by gender and age.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td>Gender</td><td>Age</td></tr><tr><td /><td>Boys <italic>M(SD)</italic><italic>n =</italic>117</td><td>Girls <italic>M(SD)</italic><italic>n =</italic> 93</td><td>F-value</td><td>3 years <italic>M(SD)</italic><italic>n =</italic> 64</td><td>4 years <italic>M(SD)</italic><italic>n =</italic> 63</td><td>5 years <italic>M(SD)</italic><italic>n =</italic> 83</td><td>F-value</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>CHEXI_WM</td><td>15.58 (6.29)</td><td>14.58 (5.39)</td><td>1.48</td><td>15.89 (5.55)</td><td>15.24 (5.59)</td><td>14.48 (6.40)</td><td>1.03</td></tr><tr><td>CHEXI_INH</td><td>23.00 (6.97)</td><td>20.58 (6.69)</td><td>6.47*</td><td>21.53 (7.38)</td><td>22.02 (6.12)</td><td>22.16 (7.22)</td><td>0.16</td></tr><tr><td>CHEXI_TOT</td><td>38.58 (11.57)</td><td>35.16 (11.15)</td><td>4.67*</td><td>37.42 (11.75)</td><td>37.25 (10.56)</td><td>36.65 (12.08)</td><td>0.09</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>3 *<emph>p<</emph>.05. CHEXI = Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory; WM = Working Memory; INH = Inhibition; TOT = CHEXI total score.</p> <hd id="AN0176845691-13">Criterion validity of the CHEXI</hd> <p>Correlations between the CHEXI subscales and the three dimensions of the CBQ (i.e., attention focusing, impulsivity, and inhibitory control) confirmed the criterion validity (see Table 4).</p> <p>Table 4. Correlations among variables.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td /><td>1</td><td>2</td><td>3</td><td>4</td><td>5</td><td>6</td><td>M(SD)</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1. CHEXI_WM</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td /><td>15.13 (5.92)</td></tr><tr><td>2. CHEXI_INH</td><td>.596***</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td /><td>21.93 (6.93)</td></tr><tr><td>3. CHEXI_TOT</td><td>.875***</td><td>.911***</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td /><td>37.07 (11.49)</td></tr><tr><td>4. CBQ_AF</td><td>−.427***</td><td>−.331***</td><td>−.420***</td><td>1</td><td /><td /><td>5.21 (1.02)</td></tr><tr><td>5. CBQ_I</td><td>.094</td><td>.142*</td><td>.134</td><td>−.208**</td><td>1</td><td /><td>4.42 (1.07)</td></tr><tr><td>6. CBQ_IC</td><td>−.315***</td><td>−.289***</td><td>−.336***</td><td>.584***</td><td>−.221**</td><td>1</td><td>4.69 (1.16)</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>4 <emph>N</emph> = 210. ***<emph>p</emph> <.001; **<emph>p</emph> <.01; *<emph>p</emph> <.05. CHEXI = Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory; WM = Working Memory; INH = Inhibition; TOT = CHEXI total score; AF = Attention Focusing; I = Impulsivity; IC = Inhibitory Control.</p> <hd id="AN0176845691-14">Discussion</hd> <p>Preschool age is a crucial period for the EFs development which are widely demonstrated to be a predictor of subsequent school and academic achievement (Miyake & Friedman, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref58">18</reflink>]; Shaul & Schwartz, 2014). The CHEXI is a parent-report questionnaire that evaluates preschoolers' EFs difficulties within the daily-life activities (Thorell & Nyberg, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref59">22</reflink>]). The present study tested the factorial structure of the CHEXI in the Italian preschoolers, confirming the robustness of the two-factors structure of the CHEXI previously found by Thorell and Nyberg ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref60">22</reflink>]) and in different cross-cultural validation (e.g., Camerota et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref61">2</reflink>]). The Italian version of the CHEXI, even if some items have been removed, is composed of the WM and INH subscales, explaining the same percentage of the variance (41%) as the original study by Thorell and Nyberg ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref62">22</reflink>]). Both subscales showed a good reliability and were modestly related to each other, suggesting they are different EFs' components that detect distinct facets of preschoolers' cognitive functioning. The fit indices of the model and the reliabilities of the Italian validation were consistent with the results of previous studies on preschool-age samples (Camerota et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref63">2</reflink>]; Giménez et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref64">5</reflink>]; Thorell & Nyberg, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref65">22</reflink>]).</p> <p>The multigroup analysis confirmed the robustness and invariance of the CHEXI structure across gender and age (see Giménez et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref66">5</reflink>]). Like previous studies (Hamamci et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref67">8</reflink>]), this research tested the criterion validity of the CHEXI through its correlations with the subscales of the CBQ (i.e., attentional focusing, impulsivity, inhibitory control) that assesses the parents' perception of preschoolers' temperamental facets of effortful control.</p> <p>As enlightened in a recent review (Schirmbeck et al., [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref68">20</reflink>]), boys showed more EFs difficulties than girls (e.g., Hamamci et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref69">8</reflink>]). There could be a parents' gender-specific cultural expectations towards their children, which scholars identified as an explaining factor contributing to discrepancy between indirect and direct assessments (Schirmbeck et al., [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref70">21</reflink>]). Moreover, albeit not significantly, means of the CHEXI total scores and of WM diminished with increasing age, as assumed by literature that showed how preschool age is critical for EFs' development (Gioia et al., [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref71">6</reflink>]).</p> <p>Nevertheless, the present study has some limitations. As in previous studies (e.g., Camerota et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref72">2</reflink>]), the CHEXI was solely completed by parents, and future studies should validate the factor structure's invariance by including different respondents (e.g., teachers). Parents and teachers may provide different information about children's EFs, capturing a wide range of skills observed in real-world contexts, such as home and school context (Toplak et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref73">23</reflink>]). Moreover, only parents of typically developing preschoolers completed the CHEXI, thus future studies should also include parents of atypically developing children, and a comparison between rating measure of EFs and performance-based tasks.</p> <p>Nonetheless, this research confirmed that the CHEXI is a reliable rating measure with ecological validity that can help detecting Italian preschoolers' EFs abilities within the daily context, not specifically focusing on items that detect ADHD symptoms, as the BRIEF-P does. The CHEXI is easily retrievable online and straightforward to administer due to its relatively short length. As suggested by Thorell and Nyberg ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref74">22</reflink>]), due to the modest correlations between CHEXI and laboratory measures, a multi-assessment strategy for EFs is preferable and more informative, indicating the importance of having rating measures with good psychometric properties for caregivers who interact with children daily. Hence, the CHEXI can provide relevant insights into detecting actual difficulties in children within real-life situations and contribute to enhancing their behaviours in familiar and educational settings. This, in turn, strengthens EFsn abilities which are crucial for positive psychosocial adjustment. Finally, the CHEXI could serve as a practical tool for clinicians to assess and track the EFs abilities and behaviours of preschool children, enabling early identification of those facing difficulties and requiring targeted support.</p> <hd id="AN0176845691-15">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).</p> <hd id="AN0176845691-16">Data availability statement</hd> <p>Data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.</p> <ref id="AN0176845691-17"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref27" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Amukune, S., & Józsa, K. (2021). The Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI): Psychometric properties and association with academic achievement in Kenyan first graders. Journal of Psychological and Educational Research, 29 (1), 154 – 176.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref7" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Camerota, M., Willoughby, M. T., Kuhn, L. J., & Blair, C. B. (2018). The Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI): Factor structure, measurement invariance, and correlates in US preschoolers. Child Neuropsychology, 24 (3), 322 – 337. https://doi.org/10.1080/09297049.2016.1247795</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref2" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Catale, C., Meulemans, T., & Thorell, L. B. (2015). The childhood executive function inventory: Confirmatory factor analyses and cross-cultural clinical validity in a sample of 8-to 11-year-old children. Journal of Attention Disorders, 19 (6), 489 – 495. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054712470971</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref1" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64 (1), 135 – 168. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref17" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Giménez, A., López-Zamora, M., Vila, O., Sánchez, A., & Thorell, L. B. (2022). Validation of the Spanish version of the Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory(CHEXI) in 4-5 year-old children. Anales de Psicología, 38 (1), 101 – 109. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.453171</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref11" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Gioia, G. A., Espy, K. A., & Isquith, P. K. (2003). Behavior rating inventory of executive function - preschool version. Psychological Assessment Resources.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref28" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Gutierrez, M., Arán Filippetti, V., & Lemos, V. (2021). The Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI) parent and teacher form: Factor structure and cognitive correlates in Spanish-speaking children from Argentina. Developmental Neuropsychology, 46 (2), 136 – 148. https://doi.org/10.1080/87565641.2021.1878175</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref20" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Hamamci, B., İ̇brahim, A. C. A. R., & Uyanik, G. (2021). Validity and reliability study of parent report of the childhood executive functioning inventory for preschoolers. Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama, 17 (2), 1 – 10. https://doi.org/10.17244/eku.884918</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref49" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6 (1), 1 – 55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Isquith, P. K., Roth, R. M., & Gioia, G. (2013). Contribution of rating scales to the assessment of executive functions. Applied Neuropsychology: Child, 2 (2), 125 – 132. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622965.2013.748389</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> ISTAT. (2019). Livelli di istruzione e ritorni occupazionali [Education and job]. https://<ulink href="http://www.istat.it/it/files/2019/07/Report-Livelli-di-istruzione-e-ritorni-occupazionali%5f2018.pdf">www.istat.it/it/files/2019/07/Report-Livelli-di-istruzione-e-ritorni-occupazionali%5f2018.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9 (2), 151 – 173. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Little, T. D., Rhemtulla, M., Gibson, K., & Schoemann, A. M. (2013). Why the items versus parcels controversy needn't be one. Psychological Methods, 18 (3), 285 – 300. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033266</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Longobardi, E., Spataro, P., Morelli, M., & Laghi, F. (2022). Executive function ratings in educational settings: Concurrent relations with cognitive and affective theory of mind. Early Child Development and Care, 192 (13), 2046 – 2058. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2021.1975692</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marano, A., Innocenzi, M., & Devescovi, A. (2014). Italian adaptation by (2014) " Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF-P)" (Gerard, A., Gioia, PK, & Isquith, SGG, Eds.). Hogrefe Italia.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mashhadi, A., Maleki, Z. H., Hasani, J., Rasoolzadeh Tabatabaei, K., & Saleh, S. (2022). Psychometric properties of the Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI): A confirmatory factor analysis and measurement invariance by sex and age in Iranian children. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 33 (3), 409 – 427. https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2021.2021952</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Matricardi, G., Albiero, P., & Cicognetti, E. (2010). Self-regulation and social behaviors in preschool age: Evaluation instruments and implications for children's adjustment. In E. Baumgartner (Ed.), The beginning of emotional competence. Instruments for the study and assessment (pp. 75 – 104). Edizioni Universitarie di Lettere Economia e Diritto.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (2012). The nature and organization of individual differences in executive functions: Four general conclusions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21 (1), 8 – 14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411429458</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Putnam, S. P., & Rothbart, M. K. (2006). Development of short and very short forms of the children's behavior questionnaire. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87 (1), 102 – 112. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8701_09</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schirmbeck, K., Rao, N., & Maehler, C. (2020). Similarities and differences across countries in the development of executive functions in children: A systematic review. Infant and Child Development, 29 (1), e2164. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.2164</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schirmbeck, K., Runge, R., Rao, N., Wang, R., Richards, B., Chan, S. W. Y., & Maehler, C. (2022). Assessing executive functions in preschoolers in Germany and Hong Kong: Testing for measurement invariance. Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science, 6 (3), 269 – 286. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41809-022-00112-0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thorell, L. B., & Nyberg, L. (2008). The Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI): A new rating instrument for parents and teachers. Developmental Neuropsychology, 33 (4), 536 – 552. https://doi.org/10.1080/87565640802101516</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013). Practitioner review: Do performance‐based measures and ratings of executive function assess the same construct? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54 (2), 131 – 143. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Trevisan, B. T., Dias, N. M., Berberian, A. D. A., & Seabra, A. G. (2017). Childhood executive functioning inventory: Adaptação e Propriedades Psicométricas da Versão Brasileira. Psico-USF, 22 (1), 63 – 74. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-82712017220106</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Mara Morelli; Matilde Brunetti; Antonio Chirumbolo; Pietro Spataro; Fiorenzo Laghi and Emiddia Longobardi</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref47"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib120" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib207" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib412" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref70"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1422758
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: The Parent-Report Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI) in Italian Preschoolers: Factor Structure, Reliability, and Criterion Validity
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Mara+Morelli%22">Mara Morelli</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3463-3685">0000-0003-3463-3685</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Matilde+Brunetti%22">Matilde Brunetti</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2809-6908">0000-0003-2809-6908</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Antonio+Chirumbolo%22">Antonio Chirumbolo</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4274-2489">0000-0002-4274-2489</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Pietro+Spataro%22">Pietro Spataro</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3204-4449">0000-0003-3204-4449</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Fiorenzo+Laghi%22">Fiorenzo Laghi</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3969-4292">0000-0003-3969-4292</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Emiddia+Longobardi%22">Emiddia Longobardi</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0997-0623">0000-0002-0997-0623</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22European+Journal+of+Developmental+Psychology%22"><i>European Journal of Developmental Psychology</i></searchLink>. 2024 21(2):293-304.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– 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: 2024
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Preschool+Children%22">Preschool Children</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cognitive+Measurement%22">Cognitive Measurement</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Executive+Function%22">Executive Function</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Factor+Structure%22">Factor Structure</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Test+Reliability%22">Test Reliability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Predictive+Validity%22">Predictive Validity</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Factor+Analysis%22">Factor Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Short+Term+Memory%22">Short Term Memory</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Inhibition%22">Inhibition</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Rating+Scales%22">Rating Scales</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cognitive+Ability%22">Cognitive Ability</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Italy%22">Italy</searchLink>
– Name: SubjectThesaurus
  Label: Assessment and Survey Identifiers
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SU" term="%22Rothbart+Infant+Behavior+Questionnaire%22">Rothbart Infant Behavior Questionnaire</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/17405629.2024.2315770
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1740-5629<br />1740-5610
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Executive functions (EFs) are a set of high-level cognitive processes that enable children to perform a goal-directed behaviour. During the preschool years, EFs undergo significant developmental changes. Therefore, it is crucial to have reliable measures that accurately evaluate preschoolers' EFs in preschool-aged children. The present study aimed to investigate the factor structure of the Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI), replicating the expected two-factor model in Italian preschoolers. A total of 210 Italian parents completed an online survey on their children aged between 36 and 72 months (Mage = 54.12; SDage = 11.22; 44.3% girls). A confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the two-factor model of the CHEXI (working memory and inhibition) for Italian preschoolers, also demonstrating the invariance of the model across gender and age. Furthermore, the criterion validity of the CHEXI was established by examining correlations with the Children's Behavior Questionnaire. The present study provides evidence that the CHEXI is a valid and reliable rating measure for assessing EFs abilities of Italian preschoolers.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1422758
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1422758
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/17405629.2024.2315770
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 12
        StartPage: 293
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Preschool Children
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cognitive Measurement
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Executive Function
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Factor Structure
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Test Reliability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Predictive Validity
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Factor Analysis
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Short Term Memory
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Inhibition
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Rating Scales
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cognitive Ability
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Italy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Rothbart Infant Behavior Questionnaire
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: The Parent-Report Childhood Executive Functioning Inventory (CHEXI) in Italian Preschoolers: Factor Structure, Reliability, and Criterion Validity
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Mara Morelli
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Matilde Brunetti
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Antonio Chirumbolo
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Pietro Spataro
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Fiorenzo Laghi
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Emiddia Longobardi
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2024
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1740-5629
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1740-5610
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 21
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: European Journal of Developmental Psychology
              Type: main
ResultId 1