Reciprocal feedback processes between experience and development are central to contemporary developmental theory. Autoregressive cross-lagged panel (ARCL) models represent a common analytic approach intended to test such dynamics. The authors demonstrate that-despite the ARCL model's intuitive appeal-it typically (a) fails to align with the theoretical processes that it is intended to test and (b) yields estimates that are difficult to interpret meaningfully. Specifically, using a Monte Carlo simulation and two empirical examples concerning the reciprocal relation between spanking and child aggression, it is shown that the cross-lagged estimates derived from the ARCL model reflect a weighted-and typically uninterpretable-amalgam of between- and within-person associations. The authors highlight one readily implemented respecification that better addresses these multiple levels of inference.
Executive functioning (EF) refers to a set of higher order, core cognitive processes that facilitate planning, problem solving, and the initiation and maintenance of goal‐directed behavior. Although recent research has established the importance of EF for word reading development in early childhood, few studies have investigated the role of EF in reading comprehension during middle childhood. This study investigated the relations between two specific dimensions of EF—attention shifting and inhibitory control—and reading comprehension for students in fourth grade (N = 120). Specifically, we used path analysis to investigate the direct, unique associations of attention shifting and inhibitory control with reading comprehension as well as the indirect associations with reading comprehension via language comprehension and word reading, controlling for working memory, processing speed, and phonological awareness. Results indicated that both attention shifting and inhibitory control demonstrated unique direct associations with reading comprehension. Attention shifting also demonstrated a significant indirect association via language comprehension. Findings support growing evidence for the importance of these EF dimensions to reading, raise questions about potential mechanisms underlying links between EF and reading comprehension, and offer implications for understanding and addressing reading comprehension difficulties.
In the current article, we contrast 2 analytical approaches to estimate the relation of parenting to executive function development in a sample of 1,292 children assessed longitudinally between the ages of 36 and 60 months of age. Children were administered a newly developed and validated battery of 6 executive function tasks tapping inhibitory control, working memory, and attention shifting. Residualized change analysis indicated that higher quality parenting as indicated by higher scores on widely used measures of parenting at both earlier and later time points predicted more positive gain in executive function at 60 months. Latent change score models in which parenting and executive function over time were held to standards of longitudinal measurement invariance provided additional evidence of the association between change in parenting quality and change in executive function. In these models, cross-lagged paths indicated that in addition to parenting predicting change in executive function, executive function bidirectionally predicted change in parenting quality. Results were robust with the addition of covariates, including child sex, race, maternal education, and household income-to-need. Strengths and drawbacks of the 2 analytic approaches are discussed, and the findings are considered in light of emerging methodological innovations for testing the extent to which executive function is malleable and open to the influence of experience.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.