Cool and hot executive function as predictors of aggression in early childhood: Differentiating between the function and form of aggression

Poland, Sarah E.; Monks, Claire P.; Tsermentseli, Stella

doi:10.1111/bjdp.12122

Cited by 96 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 88 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Teachers also completed proactive subscales from the PPRA-T. However, consistent with a recent study using the same measure (Poland, Monks, & Tsermentseli, 2016), preliminary analyses revealed that the proactive and reactive scales were highly correlated (r = .93) and did not load as separate factors. This likely stems from the high degree of similarity in item wording.…”

Section: Proactive Aggressionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Individual Differences in Prototypical Moral and Conventional Judgments and Children's Proactive and Reactive Aggression

Jambon

Smetana

2017

Child Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examined links between 4- and 6-year-olds' (n = 101; M = 5.12 years, SD = 0.67; 53% male) ability to distinguish moral and conventional transgressions along different criteria and teacher ratings of proactive and reactive aggression. Latent difference score modeling revealed that moral transgressions were judged more unacceptable and wrong independent of rules and authority than conventional violations, but significant variability in moral-conventional distinctions was also observed. Proactive aggression was associated with less-and reactive aggression was associated with greater-differentiation in moral and conventional concepts. Proactive aggression was not associated with deficits in moral knowledge when other common assessments of early moral understanding were employed, highlighting the importance of using theoretically informed measures of moral judgments and aggression.

show abstract

Section: Proactive Aggressionsupporting

confidence: 74%

Individual Differences in Prototypical Moral and Conventional Judgments and Children's Proactive and Reactive Aggression

Jambon

Smetana

2017

Child Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, Denham et al () included measures of both hot and cool EFs but found only the cool EF measures longitudinally predicted social competence. Similarly, Poland, Monks, and Tsermentseli () found that cool EF, but not hot EF, related to teacher‐reported levels of aggression. Therefore, it is necessary to further explore the individual contributions of the three cool EF components to social competence within this age group.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Granvald and Marciszko () found that all three components were related to a teacher‐reported aggression composite score in 9‐year‐old children, but only working memory and cognitive flexibility were related specifically to reactive aggression (aggressive acts in response to provocation, such as peer conflict). In contrast, Poland et al () found that inhibition was the component that was most associated with teacher‐reported reactive aggression in 4‐ to 5‐year‐old children over two verbal working memory tasks (forward and backward digit spans) and planning abilities. The difference in findings between these two studies is important to note because there is reason to believe that the structure of the EF components changes across childhood (e.g., Lee, Bull, & Ho, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…With the exception of two studies to date (i.e., Granvald & Marciszko, 2016;Poland et al, 2016), much of the past research on EF and social competence has focused on either one specific component (e.g., response inhibition; Denham et al, 2014;Hughes et al, 2000;Kochanska & Knaack, 2003;Nigg, Quamma, Greenberg, & Kusche, 1999;Rhoades et al, 2009) or used an aggregate score of multiple EF components in analyses (e.g., Alducin et al, 2014;Cole et al, 1993;Razza & Blair, 2009). However, each EF component may support a different aspect of social problem solving.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The individual contributions of three executive function components to preschool social competence

Caporaso

Boseovski

Marcovitch

2019

Infant and Child Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study explored the role of three components of executive function (EF)—response inhibition, working memory, and cognitive flexibility—in preschool children's social competence. Each component was expected to contribute uniquely to children's abilities to resolve peer conflict in a competent manner, namely, the inhibition of incompetent social responses (response inhibition), maintenance of social goals (working memory), and attentional shift between complex social rules and potential response options (cognitive flexibility). Seventy‐two 4‐to 5‐year‐old children were administered measures for each of the EF components and for peer conflict social competence. Positive associations were found between all three EF components and the social competence task, but working memory was the most highly associated with choosing competent responses to peer conflict. In addition, EF accounted for age‐related increases in competent responding. The results highlight the importance of representational abilities in the development of social competence during the preschool period. Highlights This study examined the normative developmental associations between three components of executive function and social competence in preschool. Executive function, particularly working memory, predicted age‐related changes on a peer conflict task between 4 and 5 years of age. The results suggest that the representational abilities associated with working memory may be important in the development of social competence.

show abstract

“…Interestingly, some cross-sectional research suggests that poorer EF abilities are correlated with both physical and relational aggression (McQuade, Murray-Close, Shoulberg, & Hoza, 2013;Poland, Monks, & Tsermentseli, 2016); though other work suggests a non-significant small to moderate association (r = .18) between EF impairment and relational aggression (Diamantopoulou, Rydell, Thorell, & Bohlin, 2007). Interestingly, some cross-sectional research suggests that poorer EF abilities are correlated with both physical and relational aggression (McQuade, Murray-Close, Shoulberg, & Hoza, 2013;Poland, Monks, & Tsermentseli, 2016); though other work suggests a non-significant small to moderate association (r = .18) between EF impairment and relational aggression (Diamantopoulou, Rydell, Thorell, & Bohlin, 2007).…”

Section: Peer Victimization and Aggressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer victimization and changes in physical and relational aggression: The moderating role of executive functioning abilities

McQuade

2017

Aggressive Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study is the first to examine whether executive functioning (EF) abilities moderate longitudinal associations between peer victimization and engagement in physically and relationally aggressive behavior. Participants were 61 children (9-13 years, M = 10.68, SD = 1.28; 48% male) drawn from a partially clinical sample who were assessed at two time points, approximately 12 months apart. At time 1, children were administered a battery of EF tests; adult reports of children's relational and physical victimization and use of relational and physical aggression were collected. At time 2, adult-reported aggression was re-collected. Regression analyses tested whether EF ability moderated the association between peer victimization and increased engagement in aggression. Form-specific (e.g., physical victimization predicting physical aggression) and cross-form (e.g., physical victimization predicting relational aggression) models were tested. EF moderated the association between physical victimization and increases in physical aggression over time and between relational victimization and increases in relational aggression over time. Physical victimization predicted increases in physical aggression only among children with poor EF. However, relational victimization predicted increases in relational aggression for children with good EF skills but decreases in relational aggression for children with poor EF skills. Interaction effects for cross-form models were not significant. Results suggest that there are distinct risk factors implicated in children's engagement in physical and relational aggression. Established cognitive vulnerability models for engagement in physical aggression should not be assumed to apply to engagement in relational aggression.

show abstract

Cool and hot executive function as predictors of aggression in early childhood: Differentiating between the function and form of aggression

Cited by 96 publications

References 88 publications

Individual Differences in Prototypical Moral and Conventional Judgments and Children's Proactive and Reactive Aggression

Individual Differences in Prototypical Moral and Conventional Judgments and Children's Proactive and Reactive Aggression

The individual contributions of three executive function components to preschool social competence

Peer victimization and changes in physical and relational aggression: The moderating role of executive functioning abilities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About