A Rational Account of Cognitive Control Development in Childhood

Abstract

Cognitive control is defined as a set of processes required for the organization of goal-directed thoughts and actions. It is linked to success throughout life including health, wealth, and social capital. How to support the development of cognitive control is therefore an intensively discussed topic. Progress in understanding how this critical life skill can be optimally scaffolded in long-lasting ways has been disappointing. I argue that this effort has been hampered by the predominant perspective that cognitive control is a competence or ability, the development of which is driven by predetermined maturational sequences. I propose that this traditional view needs to be overhauled in light of a growing body of evidence suggesting that cognitive control allocation is a both highly dynamic and rational process subject to cost–benefit analyses from early in development. I discuss the ramifications of shifting our perspective on cognitive control mechanisms in relation to how we design interventions. I close by spelling out new avenues for scientific inquiry. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Developmental Psychology, Volume 5 is December 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Intensive task-switching training and single-task training differentially affect behavioral and neural manifestations of cognitive control in children

“…The increased boundary-separation parameter may reflect greater control allocation to switch and repeat trials or the increased sensitivity to the cue and its changes within mixed blocks. With children in the high-intensity single-tasking group mainly practicing on the relatively easier condition of single-task blocks, they may have adopted a different strategy for the allocation of control than the high-intensity task-switching group (Shenhav et al 2013; see Steinbeis 2023 for a developmental perspective). This may have hindered them in correctly judging the required control on mixed blocks, in line with our observation that group differences in the increase in boundary separation were especially pronounced for repeat and switch trials as opposed to single trials.…”