Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/0102.

3772e382114
2022, v.38, e382114
School and Developmental Psychology

Executive Functions in the Prediction of Academic

Performance in Elementary Education*

Natália Martins Dias¹,** , Ana Paula Prust Pereira2 , & Alessandra Gotuzo Seabra2 
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Santa Catarina, Brasil
¹

2
Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brasil

ABSTRACT – The study investigated predictive models of reading and arithmetic based on performance and functional
measures of executive functions (EF’s). Ninety-four children (mean age = 6.14y) were evaluated through EF performance
tests. Parents and teachers responded to a functional measure of EF. Two years later, children’s reading and arithmetic were
evaluated. There were low correlations between EF and later academic performance. For the reading model, inhibition was
a relevant variable, with no gain in the prediction with the joint consideration of different EF measures. For arithmetic,
attention and delay aversion presented a relevant contribution. When functional measure was considered, the model’s
prediction increased. The study indicated skills of interest in identifying children at risk of poor academic performance.
KEYWORDS: regulation, child evaluation, cognition, education, learning

Funções Executivas na Predição de Desempenho Acadêmico

no Início do Ensino Fundamental

RESUMO – O estudo investigou modelos preditivos de leitura e aritmética a partir de medidas de desempenho e funcional
de funções executivas (FE). Noventa e quatro crianças (Midade= 6,14a) foram avaliadas por meio de testes de desempenho
de FE. Pais e professores responderam a uma medida funcional. Dois anos depois, leitura e aritmética foram avaliadas.
Houve baixas correlações entre FE e desempenho acadêmico posterior. Para o modelo de leitura, inibição foi variável
relevante; não houve ganho na predição com a consideração conjunta das diferentes medidas de FE. Para aritmética, atenção
e aversão ao adiamento apresentaram contribuição relevante. A consideração da medida funcional aumentou a previsão do
modelo. O estudo indicou habilidades de interesse na identificação de crianças em risco de baixo desempenho acadêmico.
PALAVRAS-CHAVE: regulação, avaliação infantil, cognição, educação, aprendizagem

Recent years have been marked by growing interest (Friedman & Miyake, 2017). Based on previous evidence
in the study of a set of skills called executive functions (e.g. Friedman & Miyake, 2017), Diamond (2013) suggested
(e.g. Diamond, 2013; Friedman & Miyake, 2017). Within three basic EF’s: 1) inhibition, the ability to inhibit
the scope of these investigations, one area of interest has inappropriate behaviors (referred to as self-control, which
been the relationship or impact of these skills on learning includes the discipline to stay on task, and delay aversion/
or school performance, notably in the areas of reading and gratification, forgoing an immediate pleasure for a greater
mathematics (Best et al., 2011; Corso et al., 2016; Purpura reward later); it also includes the ability to inhibit thoughts
et al., 2017; Röthlisberger et al., 2013; Toll et al., 2011). or memories, as well as the ability to control the attention to
EF’s are a set of high-level cognitive skills (given distractors (also referred to as interference control), which is
their regulatory action over other processes) that enable associated with selective attention; 2) working memory, the
individuals to control their actions, thoughts, and emotions ability to mentally sustain and operate information; and 3)

* Acknowledgments: CNPq – Research productivity grant to NM Dias and AG Seabra; CAPES – APPP Doctoral Scholarship.
** E-mail: natalia_mdias@yahoo.com.br
Submetido: 12/09/2019; Aceito: 07/09/2020.

1
 NM Dias, APP Pereira, & AG Seabra

cognitive flexibility, the ability to take different perspectives, both reading and mathematics. Other studies suggest more
alternate between rules and adapt to change. Complex EF’s, specific contributions.
such as planning or problem solving, would emerge from the Considering the specified disciplines, there is evidence
integrated action of the basic EF. Furthermore, overlapping for the role of EF in reading comprehension, especially in
inhibition and including some hot aspects, as maintaining skills such as working memory, planning and inhibition/
optimal levels of emotional and motivational arousal, are attentional allocation (Borella et al., 2010; Cutting et
understood as regulation or, as in Diamond’s model, self- al., 2009; Kendeou et al., 2014), with EF also appearing
regulation (Diamond, 2013). to mediate the effect of socioeconomic level on reading
Evidence suggests that EF’s develop throughout comprehension of students from the 4th to the 6th year (Corso
childhood and adolescence. It also suggests that EF’s are an et al., 2016). Even in preschool children, EF’s relationship
important component of academic success, with indications with skills of reading and writing isolated words is already
that EF’s are determinants to facilitate learning of diverse evident (Pazeto et al., 2014). Despite fewer evidence of the
school content. Likewise, EF’s also relate to the ability to role of flexibility on reading, a recent investigation shed light
solve mathematical problems, for abstract reasoning and on this question suggesting that poor comprehenders are less
for social judgments and behavior (Blair & Razza, 2007; able to actively switch focus between the phonological and
Diamond, 2013). In fact, some interesting evidence can semantic processes. In this way, an inflexible focus on word
be observed in a representative American sample study. recognition could impair more elaborate processes involved
Approximately half of Early Childhood Educators indicated in meaning comprehension (Cartwright et al., 2017).
that 50% or more of the children in their classrooms Similarly, the association between performance
experience problems that substantially limit their ability in mathematics (more specifically arithmetic) and EF
to benefit from early schooling. Although some teachers at different ages has been consistently highlighted in
identified poor academic skills in Early Childhood Education literature (Bull & Lee, 2014; Gathercole et al., 2004; Toll,
(such as letter or number knowledge) as a source of difficulty Röthlisberger et al., 2013; Van der Ven et al., 2011). Despite
for children, more problems related to self-regulation, that, recent evidence shows, in general, working memory as
in particular problems with following instructions and the main predictor of mathematical performance, with less
controlling attention, were identified by the teachers as the conclusive findings regarding the other abilities (Bull & Lee,
causes of children not being prepared for school (Rimm- 2014). A point to be highlighted is that most studies in this
Kaufman et al., 2000). area are cross-sectional, with little longitudinal evidence
More recent evidence indicates that EF in preschool (e.g., Toll et al., 2011). In Toll et al.’s study, for example,
age can predict engagement in learning situations during working memory assessed at the beginning of 1st grade has
the transition to the 1st grade of Elementary Education, been revealed as an important predictor of math difficulties
assessed as learning related behaviors, such as organizing at the end of 1st and 2nd grades.
their activities and staying focused on tasks (Nelson et al., Another example of longitudinal evidence is from
2017).Thus, implication for education is evident, in the sense Röthlisberger et al. (2013). Authors followed preschool
that knowledge about such abilities and how to assess them children for three years and found that the EF assessed
could provide teachers tools to address at least some kind during the preschool stage (unlike us, the authors used
of difficulties in their classrooms. an EF composite score derived from three performance
The relevance of EF for schooling, especially in the tasks which measure inhibition, working memory and
early years of elementary school, is so consistent that flexibility) predicted substantial variability in mathematical
recent policies in Brazil have highlighted the importance performance (from 9% to 25% of the variance, depending on
of EF developing in students. For example, at the National the cohort and measures considered), reading (from 18% to
Evidence-Based Literacy Conference, held in 2019, there 24% of the variance, depending on the cohort and measures
was a thematic axis specifically dedicated to presenting considered) and writing (from 12% to 17% of the variance,
evidence on the relationship between EF (cited as cognitive depending on the cohort considered) two years later.
self-regulation) and literacy in the early years of Elementary Analysis of academic performance profiles according to the
Education (Brasil, 2019). previous performance in EF showed that early difficulties
In fact, many studies corroborate this association of EF in the latter were associated with an academic disadvantage
with learning and academic performance. For example, Best in the initial years of formal schooling. Thus, longitudinal
et al. (2011), in a sample of children aged five to 17 years investigations in this area can contribute to the identification
old. observed generally moderate and consistent associations of early markers, so as to identify children at risk of learning
between complex EF measures (with planning demands) difficulties in the years to come in Elementary Education
and academic performance throughout the age groups and (Diamond, 2013; Purpura et al., 2017; Röthlisberger et al.,
different school measures. Their findings support the idea 2013), as well as informing early intervention studies (Dias
of EF’s as common processes and with contributions for & Seabra, 2017).

2 Psic.: Teor. e Pesq., Brasília, 2022, v. 38, e382114

 Executive Functions and Academic Performance

Another point of interest is that most studies performed Gaspar, 2012), it is known that the relationships between EF
in this area have used performance tests in the assessment scales and performance measures, as well as the agreement
of EF’s. There are some common tasks for EF assessment, between respondents in the scales, are generally low, at the
such as Go-NoGo tasks (in which a child must emit a most moderate, leading to the conclusion that measures
response to a target stimulus, but inhibit it in the face of a possibly do not measure the same aspects of EF and should
non-target stimulus) or the Stroop paradigm (in which the be considered complementary (Barkley, 2014; Martoni et al.,
child must avoid an automatic response, as reading a word, 2016; Thorell & Catale, 2014; Toplak et al., 2013).
to emit a less automatic response, as naming the color) (see
In this sense, this study integrated two questions, that is,
Dias & Malloy-Diniz, 2020, for a summary of instruments
(1) we used both types of EF measures, performance and
in Brazil). However, there are some criticisms about the
ecological validity of EF performance measures (Barkley, functional, aiming to investigate (2) predictive models of
2014; Chaytor et al., 2006; Naglieri & Goldstein, 2014). academic performance in a longitudinal study. Specifically,
One option to these more structured tasks would be our objective was to investigate predictive models of reading
the use of functional measures, such as inventories that, and arithmetic in the 2nd and 3rd year of Elementary Education
in the case of children, can be completed by parents and/ based on the performance and functional measures (as
or teachers. As already documented with other behavioral reported by parents and teachers) of EF in a two-year
inventories (Major & Seabra-Santos, 2014; Seabra-Santos & longitudinal study.

METHOD

Participants of application is 20 minutes. The result in percentiles was

used, for both the identification of children with indications
Participants of the study were 94 children (55.3% girls) of intellectual disability (percentile <4) and for the control
aged between five and seven years at the start of the study in the regression analysis. There are data of reliability and
(age in years: M=6.14; SD=0.65; age in months: M=78.94; evidence of validity acceptable for the Brazilian population
SD=6.44), recruited from three public schools. In the first available in the manual.
year of the study, 42 were enrolled in the final year of Early Simon Task (Trevisan, 2010). This task evaluates EF,
Childhood Education (Pre-II, age: M=5.67; SD=0.48, 61.9% it is computerized and consists of three parts, each one with
being girls) and 52 in the 1st year of Elementary Education 20 items. In part 1, a figure of either a frog or a butterfly is
(EE) (age: M=6.52; SD=0.51, 50% being girls). There presented on each screen, randomly and on both sides of the
were no children with indicators of intellectual deficiencies screen. At the bottom of the screen, there are two answer
(according to the Columbia Mental Maturity Scale; Alves buttons, one with the butterfly figure and the other with the
& Duarte, 2001), neurological/psychiatric syndromes frog figure. The child’s task is to select the button with the
or disorders, sensory or motor changes that affected the same stimulus figure, regardless of which side it appears on.
response to the instruments (according to school records). In part 2 of the test, an arrow is presented on each screen,
All 94 children were re-evaluated two years later, when which can point to the left or right and can be on the left or
they attended the 2nd and 3rd year of EE. All children were right side of the screen. At the bottom of the screen there are
speakers of Portuguese as their first language. 2 buttons, one on the left and one on the right. The button
The participants’ schools were in medium-low on the side the arrow points to must be pressed. Part 3 of the
socioeconomic status neighborhoods in a city of the test is composed of three conditions, in the first one, a striped
metropolitan region of São Paulo (with approximately 267 circle is displayed on either side of the screen, and the task
thousand inhabitants), Brazil. Household income of 80% of is pushing the button on the same side the circle appears.
the families was U$ 1,330.00; 20.8% of children’s fathers In the second condition, a gray circle is displayed on either
and 12.5% of their mothers had college degrees. side of the screen, and the task is pushing the button on the
opposite side. In a third condition, there are striped and gray
Instruments circles; the button must be pushed on the same side for the
striped circles and the button on the opposite side for the
Instruments used at moment 1 (Pre-II and 1st years) gray circles. For all items in the three parts of the test, the
presentation time is 2500 milliseconds (ms), and the interval
Columbia Mental Maturity Scale (CMMS; Alves between stimuli is 500ms.
& Duarte, 2001). CMMS evaluates children’s nonverbal The instrument allows four indices to be assessed, both
reasoning. Children are presented with boards containing 3 in terms of score (all in the range between 0 and 1) and
to 5 drawings each. Their task is to choose which drawing is reaction time (RT), used in the present study: performance
different or does not relate to the others. The estimated time in congruent type items (example: left arrow pointing to the

Psic.: Teor. e Pesq., Brasília, 2022, v. 38, e382114 3

 NM Dias, APP Pereira, & AG Seabra

left), a simpler measure of selective attention; performance observation of parents and teachers. It consists of 28 items,
in incongruent type items (example: left arrow pointing to the on a Likert-type scale from 1 to 5, divided into 5 subscales:
right), measure of inhibitory control; flexibility index (rule Working Memory - WM (five items; range between 5 and
alternation: items that are preceded by the opposite type, 25; e.g., The child has difficulty remembering the several
that is, congruent preceded by incongruent, or incongruent steps of a task or an activity. For example, in a school task,
preceded by congruent) and control index (rule constancy: they forget some steps), Inhibitory Control - IC (six items;
items with the same rule as the previous ones). Evidence of range between 6 – 30; e.g.: The child does things without
validity can be found in Trevisan (2010). thinking first about what can happen), Cognitive Flexibility
Cancellation Attention Test (CAT; Montiel & Seabra, - CF (five items; range between 5 – 25; e.g., The child has
2012). CAT evaluates the attention ability. It is based on the difficulty finding a new or different way to solve a problem
cancelation paradigm, where there is a target stimulus and when they have no way out), besides some more hot aspects
a matrix with different stimulus (a page with 300 stimuli). related with EF, as Delay Aversion - DA (5 items; range
Participants should cancel only the ones equal to the target between 5 – 25; e.g., When the child wants something, they
one. In the first part, a target stimulus (a geometric form) expect it to happen immediately) and State Regulation - RE
among the other distractors must be cancelled. The same is (seven items; range between 7 – 35; e.g., The child has
requested in the second part; however, the target stimulus is trouble starting an uninteresting task, they need help or more
formed by two geometric shapes. In the final part, the target time for it). Higher scores in the IFERA-I indicate greater
stimulus changes with each line. Performance was measured difficulty for the child in the different domains. Scores of
by the number of correct responses (target stimulus cancelled each subscale and of the total (range between 28 and 140)
correctly) in the three parts of the test (range between were used. The instrument has good psychometric properties
0 - 109). There is a 1-minute time limit for each part. The in the Brazilian context (Trevisan et al., submitted). In a
instrument has validity evidence and standards available recent study, IFERA-I’s domains have been revealed as
(Seabra & Dias, 2012). important predictors of behavior indices in children aged
Trail Making Test for preschool children (TMT-PC; three to six (Dias et al., 2017). For our sample, IFERA-I
Trevisan & Seabra, 2012). This task evaluates the ability showed appropriate reliability, with Cronbach’s Alpha of
of cognitive flexibility. In condition A (control), the child .96 for teachers’ responses and .83 for parents’ responses.
must connect the stimuli (images of five puppies) in order of
size. In condition B, images of bones the same sizes as the Instruments used at moment 2 (2nd and 3rd years)
dogs are introduced, and the child must match the puppies
with their appropriate bones, in order of size, connecting Word and Pseudoword Reading Competence Test
them alternately. Performance was measured from the score (WPRCT; Seabra & Capovilla, 2010). This measure
in sequences (i.e., items connected correctly in an unbroken evaluates children’s recognition of isolated words. It has
sequence) in part B of the test (range between 0 - 9). The 70 items, each one consisting of an image and a written
application is individual, with an average duration of element (either a word or pseudoword). Children must
10 minutes. Evidence of validity and normative data are read the words silently and then judge whether the written
published for preschool children (Seabra & Dias, 2012a). word corresponds to the image (thus, throughout the article,
Semantic Stroop Test (SST; Trevisan, 2010). This ‘reading’ refers more specifically to the word recognition
version of Stroop task evaluates the ability of inhibitory component). The application lasts approximately 30 minutes.
control. It is computerized and divided into two parts, with Data on the psychometric and normative characteristics are
16 items each. In the first part, the child should name the provided in the test manual. The total score was used (range
images displayed on the screen one by one (boy, girl, moon between 0 - 70).
and sun) and, in the second, they should say the opposite Arithmetic Test (AT - Seabra et al., 2013). This test
noun of the semantic pair (Example: say “boy” for the image contains six subtests that allow the evaluation of aspects of
of a “girl”). Interference performances (performance in part numerical processing and calculation, including reading and
2 minus performance in part 1 of the test), both in terms writing of numbers, writing of increasing and decreasing
of score (range between -1 and 1) and reaction time (RT), numerical sequences, comparing numerical magnitude,
were used. The application is individual, with an average calculation of operations presented in writing and orally
duration of 15 minutes. Evidence of validity can be found (including the four arithmetic operations), and word problem
in Trevisan (2010). solving (one for each arithmetic operation). The estimated
Inventory of Difficulties in Executive Functions, time of application is 25 minutes. The total score was used
Regulation and Delay Aversion (IFERA-I; Trevisan et (range between 0 - 60). Evidence of validity, reliability
al., submitted). IFERA-I is a functional scale that evaluates and normative data are reported in the study of Seabra et
the EF in day-to-day situations of a child through the al. (2013).

4 Psic.: Teor. e Pesq., Brasília, 2022, v. 38, e382114

 Executive Functions and Academic Performance

Procedure well as the responses of both respondents (correlations

inter-responders were in the range between .36 and .44, all
After the study was approved by the Research Ethics significant), separately. Consecutively, a partial correlation
Committee (CAAE no. 0001.0.272.000-11), the participating analysis was conducted, controlling by age, between
institutions were contacted, with the consent forms children’s performances in the EF measures and reading
subsequently signed. The study was presented in a meeting and arithmetic measures two years later, as well as between
with children’s parents or acting parent, and the consent the responses of parents and teachers to the IFERA-I and
forms were signed. children’s performances in reading and arithmetic two
During moment 1 of the study, the authorized children years later.
gave their own consent and were evaluated in their schools In order to test prediction models, a hierarchical multiple
and during a regular period, individually, with the Simon, linear regression analysis was conducted for each outcome
CAT, TMT-PC, SST and CMMS instruments. Data (reading and arithmetic), including age and nonverbal
collection occurred in five sessions with a mean duration reasoning as predictor variables in the first step and
of 15 minutes each. The parents and teachers were asked to children’s performances in the EF tests (sequences in part
respond to the IFERA-I (with a 96.8% teacher return and B of the TMT-PC; total correct responses in the CAT; score
79.8% parent return). This stage of collection occurred at and RT in Part 2 of the SST; interference score and RT in
the end of the school year, moment 1of the study (October the SST, score and RT for the congruent and incongruent
and November), when the children attended the Pre-II and items and the flexibility and control indexes in the Simon)
1st year. After 2 years, moment 2 started (between October in the second step. The Stepwise variable selection method
and November). The same children (now in the 2nd and 3rd was chosen, so that the analysis itself selected the relevant
year) were assessed with AT and WPRCT, collectively, in variables for each model. Subsequently, this procedure was
two 30-minute sessions. repeated. However, the predictor variables inserted in the
second step were the IFERA-I indices (IC, WM, CF, DA,
Data analysis RE and total), answered by parents and teachers. Again,
the Stepwise variable selection method was used. Based on
Descriptive statistics of children’s performance in the the previous regressions results, a new regression analysis
EF tests (Pre-II and 1st years) and reading and arithmetic was conducted for each outcome. The predictor variables
tests (2nd and 3rd year) were calculated. Initially, in order included in the first block were age and nonverbal reasoning
to decide whether the measures should be considered and, in the second block, the indices that composed the
together as a single EF measure, it was verified if there was previous models for reading (interference score in the
a high correlation among several EF measures (parents SST, RT in the Flexibility index of the Simon and the WM
and teachers’ reports and tests scores). Therefore, partial subtest of the IFERA-I answered by teachers) and arithmetic
correlations analysis were conducted, controlling for (scores in the CAT, congruent item scores of the Simon
age (in months), between the EF tests and parents and and the DA subtest of the IFERA-I answered by teachers).
teachers’ responses to the IFERA-I (results not presented The Enter method for selection of variables was used. The
in the article). This procedure revealed different patterns design allowed the verification of prediction models from
of correlations, generally low, or at the most moderate, performance tests, a functional measure and whether there
and guided the decision to continue the other analysis was gain in the prediction from the joint consideration of
considering the performance and functional measures, as the measures.

RESULTS

Table 1 shows the sample’s performance in the EF arithmetic, positive with sequences in part B of the TMT-PC,
measures (Moment 1: Pre-II and 1st year) and reading and correct responses in the CAT and scores in all the indexes of
arithmetic (Moment 2: 2nd and 3rd year). Considering the the Simon Task; and negative with RT in the incongruous
IFERA-I, answered by parents and teachers, Table 1 presents items of the Simon, in addition to a marginally significant
the means obtained by both respondents. trend, also negative, with RT in the Simon’s flexibility index.
Table 2 shows the relationships between children’s Table 2 also presents the relations between the responses
performance in the EF tests and, two years later, in the of parents and teachers to the IFERA-I and children’s
reading and arithmetic measures. Reading performance (two performance in reading and arithmetic measures. It must
years later) was related, with low magnitude, positively with be remembered that higher scores in the IFERA-I indicate
SST interference score and negatively with the RT in the greater difficulty for the child in each domain. Considering
Simon’s flexibility index. A higher number of relations, also the teachers’ responses, there was a negative relation of
of low magnitude, was observed with future performance in low magnitude between the WM index and future reading

Psic.: Teor. e Pesq., Brasília, 2022, v. 38, e382114 5

 NM Dias, APP Pereira, & AG Seabra

Table 1
Descriptive Statistics of the Performances in the EF Tests and of the Scores of Parents and Teachers in the IFERA-I at moment 1 (Pre-II and 1st year)
and of Reading and Arithmetic at moment 2 (2nd and 3rd year)

Performance tests M SD Report: IFERA-I M SD

Measures at Moment 1
CMMS (percentile) 80.15 20.45 Teachers 2.42 0.88
IC
TMT-PC - part B sequences 3.56 2.24 Parents 2.61 0.82
CAT - total correct responses 53.80 15.00 Teachers 2.23 0.91
WM
SST - interference score -0.03 0.06 Parents 2.12 0.87
SST - interference RT 0.35 0.20 Teachers 2.29 0.73
CF
Simon - congruent items 0.92 0.11 Parents 2.33 0.88
Simon - incongruent items 0.93 0.09 Teachers 2.41 0.86
DA
Simon - Flexibility 0.93 0.10 Parents 2.97 1.08
Simon - Control 0.92 0.13 Teachers 2.40 0.86
RE
Simon - congruent items RT 1.50 0.38 Parents 2.69 1.04
Simon - incongruent items RT 1.44 0.41 Teachers 2.35 0.81
Total
Simon – Flexibility RT 1.45 0.37 Parents 2.56 0.79
Simon – Control RT 1.57 0.53
Measures at Moment 2
WPRCT 59.86 8.16
AT 33.60 11.33

Table 2
Matrix of Correlations between EF Measures (performance tests and functional measure) at Moment 1 and in the Reading and Arithmetic Measures at
Moment 2, controlling by age (in months)

Measures of EF performance
TMT- SST- SST- Simon- Simon- Simon- Simon- Simon- Simon- Simon- Simon-
CAT
PC-seqB interf interf-RT Con Incon Flex Cont Con RT Incon RT Flex RT Cont RT
WPRCT r -0.09 0.14 0.29** 0.02 0.12 0.05 0.05 0.02 -0.09 -0.18 -0.22* -0.04
AT r 0.27** 0.40*** 0.14 0.03 0.36*** 0.35*** 0.33** 0.21* -0.09 -0.30** -0.20# -0.15
Functional measure of EFs
IFERA-I – Teachers IFERA-I - Parents
IC WM CF DA RE Total IC WM CF DA RE Total
WPRCT r -0.20 #
-0.24* -0.08 -0.15 -0.13 -0.14 -0.03 -0.18 -0.04 0.02 0.01 -0.03
AT r -0.13 -0.27** -0.20# -0.29** -0.24* -0.16 0.01 -0.11 -0.12 -0.12 -0.08 -0.12

Notes. * p < .05 / ** p < .01 / *** p < .001 / # p > .05 < .065; TMT-PC-seqB: score in sequences in part B of the Trail Making Test for preschool children;
CAT: total number of correct responses in the Cancellation Attention Test; SST-interf: interference score in the Semantic Stroop Test; SST-interf-RT:
interference reaction time in the Semantic Stroop Test; Simon-Con: performance in the congruent type items of the Simon Task; Simon-Incon: performance
in the incongruent type items of the Simon Task; Simon-Flex: flexibility index of the Simon Task; Simon-Cont: control index of the Simon Task; Simon-
Con RT: reaction time in the congruent type items of the Simon Task; Simon-Incon RT: reaction time in the incongruent type items of the Simon Task;
Simon-Flex RT: reaction time in the items that present rule alternation in the Simon Task; Simon-Cont RT: reaction time in the items that present rule
constancy in the Simon Task; WPRCT: Word and Pseudoword Reading Competence Test; AT: Arithmatic Test.

performance and a marginal trend in the same direction All the models had a satisfactory fit (p<0.001). Regarding
for the IC index. The WM, DA, RE and marginally CF reading, age and nonverbal reasoning were able to explain
indices presented low magnitude negative relations with 11.2% of the variance in the WPRCT performance. Also,
the performance in arithmetic two years later. There was the inclusion of the EF measures (specifically measures of
no relation between parents’ responses and children’s future inhibition and flexibility, interference score in SST and RT
performance. in the flexibility index of the Simon, respectively) raised
Considering only children’s performance in the EF tests, the predictive power of the model to 23.1%, overriding the
in addition to controlling by age and nonverbal reasoning, contribution of age and nonverbal reasoning. For arithmetic,
explanatory models of reading and arithmetic were tested. 34% of the variance in the AT performance was explained

6 Psic.: Teor. e Pesq., Brasília, 2022, v. 38, e382114

 Executive Functions and Academic Performance

by age and reasoning, and the inclusion of EF measures From the results of the regressions conducted with the
(especially attention, i.e., CAT and congruent items from measures of the performance tests and the IFERA-I, new
Simon) increased the explanatory power of the model analyses were conducted, inserting as predictor variables
to 46.3%, overriding the contribution of reasoning. Age the indexes that composed the previous models for each
continued to have a significant contribution to the model. outcome, including performance measures and reports. The
The same procedure was repeated considering the resulting models are shown in Table 3. For reading (fit of the
responses of parents and teachers to the IFERA-I. Again, model with p<0.001), there was no gain in the prediction in
all models had a satisfactory fit (p<0.005). After the step relation to the first model tested (only with the performance
of controlling by age and reasoning, it was verified that tests), with the highest regression index being associated to
the inclusion of the WM index, according to the teachers’ the interference score in the SST, and the contributions of
responses, was able to contribute, in a modest but significant the Simon and WM of the IFERA-I becoming marginally
way, to the reading model, increasing its explanatory power significant. In turn, for the arithmetic model (fit of the model
to 13.4%. Similarly, the DA index, also according to the with p<0.001), adding the performances in the tests and
teachers’ responses, increased the explanatory power of the teachers’ responses to the IFERA-I (the DA index) led to
arithmetic model to 41.3%. an explanatory power of 57.2% of the variance.

Table 3
Prediction Models of the Performance in Reading and Arithmetic, with control of Age (in months) and nonverbal Reasoning, from the Variables selected
between children’s Performances in EF tests and Responses of Parents and Teachers to the IFERA-I

Reading
Beta t p R2 Adjusted R2
(Constant) 3.712 0.000
Age 0.216 2.139 0.035
Nonverbal reasoning 0.134 1.396 0.166
0.276 0.233
SST - interference score 0.281 2.986 0.004
Simon – Flexibility RT -0.184 -1.818 0.073
IFERA-I – WM - Teachers -0.176 -1.823 0.072
Arithmetic
Beta t p R2 Adjusted R2
(Constant) -3.801 0.000
Age 0.380 4.788 0.000
Nonverbal reasoning 0.036 0.481 0.632
0.596 0.572
CAT 0.326 4.003 0.000
Simon - congruent items 0.285 3.745 0.000
IFERA-I DA- teachers -0.155 -2.081 0.040

DISCUSSION

The study aimed to investigate predictive models of Several significant relations were evidenced between
reading and arithmetic skills in children in the 2nd and 3rd year children’s performance in the EF tests and scores attributed
of EE based on EF performance and functional measures (as to the IFERA-I by the teachers and the reading and
reported by parents and teachers) in the preschool and 1st year arithmetic skill levels two years later. These results indicate
of EE. In agreement with literature, the results also revealed a clear trend that preschool and 1st years children who
low magnitude relations between EF performance tests show better performance in EFs also tend to present better
and the responses of parents and teachers to the IFERA-I academic performance in future grades, which is consistent
(Barkley, 2014; Martoni et al., 2016; Thorell & Catale, 2014; with literature (Blair & Razza, 2007; Diamond, 2013;
Toplak et al., 2013), as well as low concordance between Röthlisberger et al., 2013; Toll et al., 2011).
the respondents in the inventory (Major & Seabra-Santos, Considering the performance tests, in all cases, children
2014; Martoni et al., 2016; Seabra-Santos & Gaspar, 2012), with better scores in the corresponding EF test indices and
justifying the use of each of those measures (instead of a with faster RT tended to present better performance in reading
composite score) in the analysis. and arithmetic. Specifically, although the performance in

Psic.: Teor. e Pesq., Brasília, 2022, v. 38, e382114 7

 NM Dias, APP Pereira, & AG Seabra

reading also established a relation with the EF measures, to create, apply and monitor the effectiveness of a plan) and
a greater number and more consistent relations were that the use of more specific measures on this construct
found with the arithmetic test indices. In general, reading can help elucidate associations and specific demands (e.g.
performance was associated with previous performance in a Purpura et al., 2017). In an attempt to better understand
measure of inhibition (control of interference) and flexibility. these demands and from this first analysis, the study tested
Arithmetic was associated with previous performances in predictive models.
attention, flexibility and inhibition (inhibition of response). Considering reading, children’s performances in indices
It is possible to hypothesize about the role of such of inhibition and flexibility showed a significant contribution
processes in reading and arithmetic performance. For (accounting for 23.1% of the variance in the outcome,
example, inhibition has a role in preventing impulsive controlling for age and nonverbal reasoning). In turn, scores
behavior but also in the control of attention, allowing the attributed by the teachers to the working memory index
selection of important information and protecting working also had a significant contribution to the model (explaining
memory content by suppressing distractors. Also, inhibition 13.4% of the variance in the outcome, controlling by age and
can allow suppression of competing responses. These nonverbal reasoning). However, the combined consideration
processes help keeping a child on the task and probably of children’s performance and teachers’ responses to the
allow more effective processes in working memory. IFERA-I did not lead to an increase in the prediction
About flexibility, it is possible that competences such as (23.3%), with the contribution of the flexibility performance
arithmetic or even word recognition require some different measure and the functional measure of working memory
processes; therefore, being able to switch between them being only marginally significant and the interference control
effectively could allow a better performance. For example, measure being the most relevant to the model. This finding
for arithmetic, the child must recognize numbers or signs suggests that the consideration of functional measures did
and, in the same task, apply calculation procedures or, not provide an incremental contribution to the variance
another example, translate a word problem in an arithmetic already explained by the performance measures in reading
operation. For reading, even for word recognition, processes prediction.
for letter recognition and decoding occur at the same time This result may be related to the reading measure used,
with those involved in semantic processing. which evaluated more specific processes of word recognition.
Considering the functional measure, no association with It is recognized that there is a greater demand for EF in more
reading and arithmetic performance was observed when complex measures, such as reading comprehension (Borella
considering parents’ responses, which may suggest that et al., 2010; Corso et al., 2016; Kendeou et al., 2014).
teachers’ evaluation was more sensitive and discriminative However, as our sample was in the early years of EE, it was
(Martoni et al., 2016). Given the teachers’ responses, the judged to be more pertinent to evaluate more basic processes
children evaluated in the preschool and 1st year with greater of reading, hence the selection of the ability to recognize
working memory difficulties and, marginally, inhibitory words. Interestingly, even though word recognition and
control difficulties, tended to perform worse in reading reading comprehension are distinct processes (although
two years later. Again, more relations were observed with consistently associated, e.g. r=0.76 and p<0.001 according to
performance in arithmetic, suggesting that children with Seabra & Dias, 2012b in a study with Brazilian children) the
greater difficulties in working memory, delay aversion, results of the present study are in line with those of Borella
regulation, and, marginally, flexibility, are more prone to et al. (2010), which evidenced the role of inhibition in the
difficulties in arithmetic two years later. The greater number processes of reading comprehension. Specifically, Borella et
of associations evidenced with the arithmetic measure in al. found that poor comprehenders have problems with the
comparison to the reading measure may be linked to the elimination of no longer relevant information from memory.
demands involved in each of these tasks. That is, we indeed Our results suggest that executive functions, and specifically
expected more relations with arithmetic performance, inhibition here, may also play a role in the most basic word
once our task included not only number processing but recognition processes. This understanding is supported by
also calculation, which demands applying procedures, the findings of Purpura et al. (2017) who, in a sample of
performing operations, and even solving written problems. preschool children, found an association between inhibition
All of these require collecting relevant information, and skills such as knowledge of letters and their sounds and
choosing strategies, conforming on rules, staying on task, discrimination of letters and words.
and manipulating information. The specific role inhibition has for word recognition
Hence, when considering some findings, such as those of (or more specifically for our measure of word recognition)
Best et al. (2011), who argue that EF are common processes can only be postulated. Analogue to Borella et al. (2010),
with contributions for both reading and mathematics, it it is possible that inhibiting no relevant information and
should be taken into consideration that these authors used maintaining as active only the relevant ones to answer the
complex EF measures (they focused on the Planning scale item is also important even for more basic processes as word
of the Cognitive Assessment System, which require the child recognition, at least at the moment when such ability is not

8 Psic.: Teor. e Pesq., Brasília, 2022, v. 38, e382114

 Executive Functions and Academic Performance

automatized yet, as probably in the case of our children. speed and comprehension. For mathematics, however, the
Also, interference control is related with the attentional present study findings extrapolate previous findings (in the
focus control, very demanded in our task. For example, study by Röthlisberger et al., the prediction ranged from
some items have semantic (as the correct word RADIO but 9% to 25% of the variance, depending on the cohort and
paired with an image of a telephone) or visual changes (as measures considered).
the Kangaroo item: It is written ‘CANCURU’; the correct A point worth mentioning is about the differential
spelling is CANGURU) that may go unnoticed for a more predictive capability of parents and teachers. One hypothesis
inattentive reader. for such finding could be related with the nature of the
In turn, considering the performance in arithmetic, IFERA-I’s items. In this sense, items capture some behavior
children’s performance in attention indices increased the samples that could manifest in different ways in different
predictive power of the model to 46.3% (a gain of 12.3% contexts (home versus school) or it could be the case that,
in relation to that explained only by age and nonverbal due to demands of school environment, teachers may
reasoning). In a very similar way, the scores in the delay be in best conditions to observe and rate such behaviors
aversion index based on teachers’ responses also contributed (see examples of IFERA-I’s item in the Method section).
to an explanation of 41.3% of the variance in arithmetic. Suchlike discussion is also boosted by Martoni et al. (2016).
However, unlike what was observed in reading, the Also, literature supports that functional measures can capture
joint consideration of children’s performance and scores different aspects from those assessed by performance tests
attributed by the teachers increased the explanatory power (Barkley, 2014; Naglieri & Goldstein, 2014). In this way,
of the model even more, overriding the contribution of we can infer that the role of EF is not just to support the
reasoning. That is, in the case of arithmetic performance, cognitive operations underlying academic performance
the delay aversion index of the IFERA-I had an incremental (as more directed assessed by performance tests), but also
contribution to children’s performance in the attention to enable the child to benefit from instruction by allowing
indices, reaching an explanatory model of almost 60%. It them to pay attention during class, to switch comfortably
is likely that the delay aversion measure, considering the between tasks, to be able to wait for their turn and stay on
fact that it established a higher relation with performance task, for example. These can be referred to as learning-
in arithmetic, is mediating the effects of other indices of the related behaviors, which can facilitate learning diverse
IFERA-I. Therefore, it cannot be said that other skills do not school content, and can possibly even mediate EF effects
contribute to the arithmetic performance, but rather that their on learning (Nelson et al., 2017).
contribution should be included in the more robust/relevant The study has limitations, such as the number of
contribution of the delay aversion index. participants, which made it impossible to separate analysis
Thus, performances in attention and the evaluation by by school level, which perhaps would have allowed more
the teacher of delay aversion seem to be relatively sensitive refined performance predictions. Other limitations refer to
indices of arithmetic performance two years later. In part, the sample by convenience from public schools only and
this result corroborates the data of Purpura et al. (2017) the absence of other controls, such as socioeconomic level,
who, in a preschool sample, found that performance in which could also be a variable of impact on the outcomes of
inhibition measures were associated with most measures interest. It is worth noting that our conclusions are limited
of mathematics. It should be remembered that attention by the specific measures we use, mainly in the case of our
is considered an aspect of inhibition, insofar as it enables finding for reading. That is, the potential of the study to
control of the attentional focus and inhibition of distractors draw conclusions on reading competence is quite limited,
(Diamond, 2013). Similarly, delay aversion has been and one should consider that the specific contribution of
considered in some studies as an inhibition index (ability the study in this area is in relation with a singular reading
to inhibit an immediate temptation in favor of something component, word recognition. Nevertheless, given the
more important) (e.g., Schoemaker, Mulder et al., 2013). educational level we evaluate and reading proficiency in
In this way, children who are more capable of focusing Brazilian children, this appears to be the most appropriate
their attention may be more effective in selecting relevant component to investigate. On the other hand, our arithmetic
information and staying on task despite the fact that no measure seems to be a more complete one in the sense it
immediate reward revealed more successful in the arithmetic covers number processing and calculation domains. Future
task. research could look deeper into such components and
In general, the results for reading are consistent with the investigate EF specific contributions to number processing
previous finding of a longitudinal study that; however, used abilities, such as counting, or more complex skills, such as
a composite index of EFs. In the present study, predictions calculation, and word problem solving, for instance.
for reading between 13.4% and 23.3% were established. The Despite these limitations, the originality of the study
findings of Röthlisberger et al. (2013) were able to explain in the use of different types of measures (performance and
between 18% and 24% of the variance in measures of reading functional) and verification of its complementarity in the

Psic.: Teor. e Pesq., Brasília, 2022, v. 38, e382114 9

 NM Dias, APP Pereira, & AG Seabra

investigation of academic performance predictive models are specifically for predicting academic performance, teachers’
highlighted. The scarcity of longitudinal design predictive reports should be preferred rather than parents’.
studies in the national context should also be highlighted. Also, our results dialogue with educational practices
Future studies should investigate EF predictive power to inform the relevance of considering EF in childhood
on more complex academic outcomes, such as reading and understanding the relations between such abilities and
comprehension, and throughout more advanced school levels learning, and schooling process. This is one of the objectives
and with other measures, including neurobiological ones. of the so-called School Neuropsychology (Fonseca et al.,
Finally, the findings allow us to draw some implication 2020).
for the field of EF measurement in children. Indeed, there The results illustrate the predictive power of EF on
is some substrate to affirm that performance tests and our performances in reading and arithmetic two years later,
functional measure are not assessing the same aspects of overriding the contribution of nonverbal reasoning,
EF (Barkley, 2014; Naglieri & Goldstein, 2014; Martoni corroborating the role of these skills in learning and
et al., 2016; Thorell & Catale, 2014; Toplak et al., 2013). academic performance (Blair & Razza, 2007; Diamond,
Performance tests capture underlying specific processes 2013; Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2000). The findings highlight
whereas functional measures allow looking at global the incremental value of using functional measures for the
aspects of functioning in contexts of interest, including specific prediction of arithmetic performance. The results
such learning-related behaviors. When predicting children’s also indicate skills of interest in the preschool and 1st year
learning outcomes both should be considered, above all for of EE that can be monitored and evaluated (as well as
more complex outcomes (as our arithmetic measure instead stimulated) for the early identification of children at risk of
of a more basic word recognition one). For parsimony, and poor academic performance.

REFERENCES

Alves, I., & Duarte, J. (2001). Escala de Maturidade Mental Corso, H. V., Cromley, J., Sperb, T., & Salles, J. (2016). Modeling
Columbia [Columbia Mental Maturity Scale]. Casa do the relationship among reading comprehension, intelligence,
Psicólogo. socioeconomic status, and neuropsychological functions:
Barkley, R. A. (2014). The Assessment of Executive Functioning The mediating role of executive functions. Psychology &
Using the Barkley Deficits in Executive Functioning Scales. Neuroscience, 9, 32–45. https://doi.org/10.1037/pne0000036
In S. Goldstein & J. A. Naglieri (Eds.), Handbook of Executive Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of
Functioning (pp. 245–264). Springer Science and Business Psychologys, 64, 135–168. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-
Media. psych-113011-143750
Best, J. R., Miller, P. H., & Naglieri, J. A. (2011). Relations between Dias, N. M., & Malloy-Diniz, L. F. (2020). Funções Executivas:
Executive Function and Academic Achievement from Ages 5 modelos e aplicações. Pearson.
to 17 in a Large, Representative National Sample. Learning Dias, N. M., & Seabra, A. G. (2017). Intervention for executive
and Individual Differences, 21(4), 327–336. https://doi. functions development in early elementary school children:
org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.01.007 effects on learning and behaviour, and follow-up maintenance.
Blair, C., & Razza, R. P. (2007). Relating Effortful Control, Educational Psychology, 37(4), 468-486. https://doi.org/10.1
Executive Function, and False Belief Understanding to 080/01443410.2016.1214686
Emerging Math and Literacy Ability in Kindergarten. Child Dias, N. M., Trevisan, B. T., Leon, C. B. R., Prust, A. P., & Seabra,
Development, 78(2), 647–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- A. G. (2017). Can Executive Functions Predict Behavior
8624.2007.01019.x in Preschool Children? Psychology & Neuroscience, 10(4),
Borella, E., Carretti, B., & Pelegrina, S. (2010). The Specific Role 383–393. https://doi.org/10.1037/pne0000104
of Inhibition in Reading Comprehension in Good and Poor Fonseca, R. P., Miranda, M. C., & Seabra, A. G. (in press).
Comprehenders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 43(6), Neuropsicologia Escolar. Pearson.
541–552. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219410371676 Friedman, N. P., & Miyake, A. (2017). Unity and Diversity of
Brasil, Ministério da Educação. (2019). Portaria nº 1.460, de 15 de Executive Functions: Individual Differences as a Window
agosto de 2019. Diário Oficial da União, Edição: 159, Seção: 1, on Cognitive Structure. Cortex, 86, 186-204. https://doi.
Página: 28. https://www.in.gov.br/web/dou/-/portaria-n-1.460- org/10.1016/j.cortex.2016.04.023
de-15-de-agosto-de-2019-211216061 Gathercole, S. E., Pickering, S. J., Knight, C., & Stegmann, Z.
Bull, R., & Lee, K. (2014). Executive Functioning and Mathematics (2004). Working memory skills and educational attainment:
Achievement. Child Development Perspectives, 8(1), 36–41. evidence from national curriculum assessments at 7 and 14
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12059 years of age. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18(1), 1–16.
Cartwright, K. B., Coppage, E., Lane, A., Singleton, T., Marshall, https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.934
T., & Bentivegna, C. (2017). Cognitive flexibility deficits in Kendeou, P., van den Broek, P., Helder, A., & Karlsson, J. (2014).
children with specific reading comprehension difficulties. A Cognitive View of Reading Comprehension: Implications
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 50, 33-44. https://doi. for Reading Difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research &
org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2016.01.003 Practice, 29(1), 10–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12025
Chaytor, N., Schmitteredgecombe, M., & Burr, R. (2006). Improving Major, S., & Seabra-Santos, M. J. (2014). Parents and/or
the ecological validity of executive functioning assessment. Teachers? Inter-Ratter Agreement on Preschoolers Social-
Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 21(3), 217–227. https:// Emotional Assessment. Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa, 30,
doi.org/10.1016/j.acn.2005.12.002 373–383.

10 Psic.: Teor. e Pesq., Brasília, 2022, v. 38, e382114

 Executive Functions and Academic Performance

Martoni, A. T., Trevisan, B. T., Dias, N. M., & Seabra, A. G. pré-escolares? Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 25(2), 203–211.
(2016). Funções executivas: relação entre relatos de pais, de https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-79722012000200001
professores e desempenho de crianças. Temas em Psicologia, Seabra, A. G., & Capovilla, F. C. (2010). Teste de Competência de
24(1), 173–188. https://doi.org/10.9788/TP2016.1-12 Leitura de Palavras e Pseudopalavras - TCLPP. Memnon.
Montiel, J. M., & Seabra, A. G. (2012). Teste de Atenção por Seabra, A. G., & Dias, N. M. (2012a). Avaliação Neuropsicológica
Cancelamento. In A. G. Seabra & N. M. Dias (Eds.), Avaliação Cognitiva: atenção e funções executivas (1st ed.). Memnon.
Neuropsicológica Cognitiva: Atenção e funções executivas Seabra, A. G., & Dias, N. M. (2012b). Reconhecimento de palavras
(pp. 57–66). Memnon. e compreensão de leitura: dissociação e habilidades linguístico-
Naglieri, J. A., & Goldstein, S. (2014). Assessment of Executive mnemônicas preditoras. Neuropsicologia Latinoamericana,
Function Using Rating Scales: Psychometric Considerations. 4(1), 43-53.
In S. Goldstein & J. A. Naglieri (Eds.), Handbook of Executive Seabra, A. G., Dias, N. M., & Capovilla, F. C. (2013). Avaliação
Functioning (pp. 159–170). Springer Science and Business Media. Neuropsicológica Cognitiva: leitura, escrita e aritmética.
Nelson, T. D., Nelson, J. M., James, T. D., Clark, C. A. C., Kidwell, Memnon.
K. M., & Espy, K. A. (2017). Executive control goes to school: Thorell, L. B., & Catale, C. (2014). The Assessment of Executive
Implications of preschool executive performance for observed Functioning Using the Childhood Executive Functioning
elementary classroom learning engagement. Developmental Inventory (CHEXI). In S. Goldstein & J. A. Naglieri (Eds.),
Psychology, 53(5), 836–844. https://doi.org/10.1037/ Handbook of Executive Functioning (pp. 359–366). Springer
dev0000296 Science and Business Media.
Pazeto, T. C. B., Seabra, A. G., & Dias, N. M. (2014). Executive Toll, S. W., van der Ven, S., Kroesbergen, E., & Van Luit, J. E.
functions, oral language and writing in preschool children: (2011). Executive functions as predictors of math learning
Development and correlations. Paidéia, 24(58), 213–221. disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44(6), 521–532.
https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-43272458201409 https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219410387302
Purpura, D. J., Schmitt, S. A., & Ganley, C. M. (2017). Foundations Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013). Practitioner
of mathematics and literacy: The role of executive functioning Review: Do performance-based measures and ratings of
components. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 153, executive function assess the same construct? Journal of
15–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2016.08.010 Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54(2), 131–143. https://doi.
Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Pianta, R. C., & Cox, M. J. (2000). Teachers’ org/10.1111/jcpp.12001
judgments of problems in the transition to kindergarten. Early Trevisan, B. T. (2010). Atenção e controle inibitório em pré-
Childhood Research Quarterly, 15(2), 147–166. https://doi. escolares e correlação com indicadores de desatenção
org/10.1016/s0885-2006(00)00049-1 e hiperatividade [Master’s Dissertation, Universidade
Röthlisberger, M., Neuenschwander, R., Cimeli, P., & Roebers, Presbiteriana Mackenzie]. Biblioteca Digital de Teses e
C. M. (2013). Executive Functions in 5- to 8-Year Olds: Dissertações Mackenzie. http://tede.mackenzie.br/jspui/
Developmental Changes and Relationship to Academic handle/tede/1537
Achievement. Journal of Educational and Developmental Trevisan, B. T., Berberian, A. A., Dias, N. M., Roama-Alves, R. J.,
Psychology, 3(2), 153. https://doi.org/10.5539/jedp.v3n2p153 & Seabra, A. G. (submitted). Development and psychometric
Schoemaker, K., Mulder, H., Deković, M., & Matthys, W. (2013). properties of the Difficulties in Executive Functions,
Executive functions in preschool children with externalizing Regulation and Delay Aversion Inventory (IFERA-I).
behavior problems: A meta-analysis. Journal of abnormal Avaliação Psicológica.
child psychology, 41(3), 457-471. https://doi.org/10.1007/ Trevisan, B. T., & Seabra, A. G. (2012). Teste de trilhas para pré-
s10802-012-9684-x escolares. In A. G. Seabra & N. M. Dias (Eds.), Avaliação
Seabra-Santos, M. J., & Gaspar, M. F. F. (2012). Pais, educadores Neuropsicológica Cognitiva: Atenção e funções executivas
e testes: estão de acordo na avaliação de aptidões de crianças (pp. 92–100). Memnon.

Psic.: Teor. e Pesq., Brasília, 2022, v. 38, e382114 11