Predictors of cognitive enhancement after training in preschoolers from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds

Abstract

The association between socioeconomic status and child cognitive development, and the positive impact of interventions aimed at optimizing cognitive performance, are well-documented. However, few studies have examined how specific socio-environmental factors may moderate the impact of cognitive interventions among poor children. In the present study, we examined how such factors predicted cognitive trajectories during the preschool years, in two samples of children from Argentina, who participated in two cognitive training programs (CTPs) between the years 2002 and 2005: the School Intervention Program (SIP; N = 745) and the Cognitive Training Program (CTP; N = 333). In both programs children were trained weekly for 16 weeks and tested before and after the intervention using a battery of tasks assessing several cognitive control processes (attention, inhibitory control, working memory, flexibility and planning). After applying mixed model analyses, we identified sets of socio-environmental predictors that were associated with higher levels of pre-intervention cognitive control performance and with increased improvement in cognitive control from pre- to post-intervention. Child age, housing conditions, social resources, parental occupation and family composition were associated with performance in specific cognitive domains at baseline. Housing conditions, social resources, parental occupation, family composition, maternal physical health, age, group (intervention/control) and the number of training sessions were related to improvements in specific cognitive skills from pre- to post-training.

Cognitive neuroscience, developmental psychology, and education: Interdisciplinary development of an intervention for low socioeconomic status kindergarten children

“…Although the EF tests presented here had been used in previous studies and proved to be useful in detecting changes produced by other types of interventions [76], it is possible that they failed to detect the effects of this broader intervention whereas grades performed better. However, whether the battery used had enough sensitivity remains an open question and cannot be answered with the applied design.…”

“…During recent years, several studies have shown that EF can be improved following a systematically-increasing EF-demand schedule [70][71][72][73][74][75][76][77][78][79]. However, few of those trainings have been conducted by teachers in classes.…”

“…Specifically, the six educational researchers that were part of the interdisciplinary team were also professors at different education programs and courses for kindergarten teachers. Four researchers in cognitive neuroscience and developmental psychology, experienced in interventions in poverty contexts [76], completed the team. During the meetings the team designed sequences of activities aimed at training EF.…”

Individual Differences and Long-term Consequences of tDCS-augmented Cognitive Training

“…Finally, other factors, such as gender, have been found to influence the outcome of training in some studies (Söderqvist, Bergman Nutley, Ottersen, Grill, & Klingberg, 2012) but not others (Klingberg et al, 2005). It remains possible that a number of other factors that have been largely unexplored (e.g., socioeconomic status, although see Segretin et al, 2014) may play a role, at least in some interventions.…”

Cognitive stimulation in children at social risk: its transference to school performance

“…In addition, specific mediators of the effects of childhood poverty have been identified, including low parental education levels, little cognitive stimulation at home, limited language interactions from parents to children, overcrowding, poor housing conditions, pre and post-natal stress and anxiety or depression on the part of parents (Noble & Farah, 2013;Segretin et al, 2014).…”