Advances in Cognitive Sciences

fa طراحی و اعتبارسنجی برنامه آموزشی کارکردهای اجرایی و تاثیر آن بر بازداری پاسخ کودکان پیش‌دبستانی Design, validation, and efficacy of an executive function training program on response inhibition in preschool children آموزش و پرورش و بازتوانی شناختی پژوهشي اصیل Research <div style="text-align: justify;">مقدمه: کارکرد‌های اجرایی، مجموعه‌ای از فرآیند‌های شناختی است که نقش بسزایی در تنظیم رفتار انسان‌ها دارند. از آنجایی که در دوران پیش‌دبستانی رشد این مهارت‌ها به حداکثر میزان خود می‌رسد، آموزش و تقویت آن می‌تواند تأثیر بسزایی در کنترل هیجانی کودکان داشته باشد. هدف از این پژوهش طراحی بسته آموزشی کارکردهای اجرایی و بررسی اثربخشی آن بازداری پاسخ کودکان پیش‌دبستان بود. روش کار: پژوهش حاضر با طرح پیش‌آزمون_پس‌آزمون با گروه کنترل و دوره پیگیری دو ماهه انجام شد. جامعه آماری شامل کودکان مراکز پیش‌دبستانی شهر تهران در سال تحصیلی 1402-1401 بود. با استفاده از روش نمونه‌گیری تصادفی، 38 کودک انتخاب و به طور تصادفی در دو گروه آزمایش و کنترل قرار گرفتند. گروه آزمایش 20 جلسه مداخله آموزشی دریافت کردند. شرکت‌کنندگان در پیش‌آزمون_پس‌آزمون و دو ماه پس از انجام مداخله به پرسشنامه رفتاری کارکردهای اجرایی (BRIEF) پاسخ دادند. تجزیه و تحلیل داده‌ها با استفاده از آزمون تحلیل واریانس آمیخته و در فضای نرمافزارSPSS  نسخه 25 انجام شد. یافته‌ها: بر اساس یافته‌های به دست آمده برنامه آموزشی طراحی شده به طور موثری سبب افزایش مهارت بازداری پاسخ کودکان پیش‌دبستانی شد (0/001P<). نتیجه‌گیری: نتایج نشان داد که ارائه آموزش‌های مبتنی بر کارکردهای اجرایی می‌تواند سبب بهبود عملکرد بازداری پاسخ در کودکان پیش‌دبستان گردد و اهمیت و نقش مداخله به هنگام در رشد شناختی کودکان را بیش از پیش نمایان می‌سازد.  </div> Introduction Executive functions refer to an individual’s actions for self-regulation, controlled and purposeful behavior, and maximizing future outcomes. In recent years, with significant growth in preschool centers, particularly in urban areas, parents and educators have become increasingly aware of the role of executive functions in learning. According to Miyake’s three-component model classification, fundamental executive functions include updating working memory, inhibitory control, and flexibility. Therefore, inhibitory control is recognized as a foundational component in executive functions. According to Barkley, inhibitory control aids in delaying responses and controlling interference, playing a crucial role in behavior regulation. Given the significance of executive functions, extensive studies have been conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of educational programs aiming to strengthen children and adolescents’ executive functions, both domestically and internationally. However, a considerable portion of these studies has focused on investigating executive functions in preschool children or children with special needs. Additionally, despite the importance of executive functions in learning and individual life, studies focused on skills associated with executive functions are limited. This limitation highlights the need to formulate and implement programs to strengthen executive functions, leading to the current research that aims to develop an educational package to enhance executive functions and determine its impact on inhibitory control in preschool children. Methods The present study followed an experimental pre-test-post-test design with a control group and a follow-up period. The statistical population included preschoolers aged 5-6 in Tehran, Iran, who were enrolled in preschool centers in the 2022-2023 academic year. Among educational districts, Area 8 was randomly selected, and from the preschool centers in this area, two pre-schools were randomly chosen: One as the experimental group and one as the control group. Twenty students were randomly selected from each pre-school, and a total of 40 students participated in the research. Eventually, due to incomplete data from one student in the control group, data from 19 students in both the control and experimental groups were analyzed. The primary objective of this research was to examine the validity and reliability of the developed executive functions educational package and investigate its effectiveness on inhibitory control in preschool children. The following 4-stage experiment was conducted to achieve this goal: First Stage: Conducting a literature review for the research background. Second Stage: Designing an educational package - training to enhance inhibitory response skills and assessing content validity. To assess content validity using the Lawshe method, the content was evaluated by ten specialists in executive functions evaluated the content. The content validity ratio (CVR) and content validity index (CVI) were evaluated, and the content was modified based on the experts' opinions. Third Stage: Pilot study. Ten available students underwent 12 one-hour sessions over two days per week. After a reassessment, the number of sessions was ultimately adjusted to 20 one-hour sessions conducted thrice weekly. Fourth Stage: Main study. Before the experiment, parents of the students in both the experimental and control groups responded to the inhibitory response section of the Brief questionnaire. Then, the educational package was implemented for 20 one-hour sessions over three days per week with the students in the experimental group. The control group students did not receive this training. After the experiment, parents of both groups responded to the Brief behavioral questionnaire as a post-test. After a two-month interval from the pre-test, a follow-up test was conducted, and parents of both groups answered the Brief questionnaire again, and the collected data was analyzed. Results To understand the average performance and distribution of test scores in the inhibitory response variable, statistical descriptions of inhibitory response variables for both the experimental and control groups were examined, including means, standard deviations, and skewness. In the control group, the total scores for inhibitory response were 35 in the pre-test, 34.84 in the post-test, and 34.78 in the follow-up, indicating very slight changes. In the experimental group, the average scores were 35.42 in the pre-test, 28.52 in the post-test, and 25.5 in the follow-up, showing a decreasing trend. The average performance in the control group compared to the experimental group had an imperceptible difference in the pretest (0.42), a difference of 6.32 scores in the post-test favoring the control group, and reduced to 11.11 in the follow-up. This trend suggests a decrease in inhibitory response scores and an improvement in inhibitory response skills in the experimental group compared to the control group. At the same time, no significant difference was observed in the control group in the scores between pre-test, post-test, and follow-up. Additionally, to investigate the homogeneity of the variables’ covariance, Mauchly’s sphericity test was utilized. Given that Mauchly’s sphericity test is less than 0.5, indicating a significant violation of homogeneity assumption (P<0.05; χ²=6.62; ε=0.03), suggesting that covariance homogeneity is questioned. Therefore, adjustments for the violation of assumptions were made using the Huynh-Feldt Epsilon correction due to the adequate sample size in this study. The summary of the within-group analysis of variance indicates a significant effect on inhibitory response (P< 0.001; F=145.83). Moreover, there is a significant interaction effect between inhibitory response and group (P<0.001; F=135.16). This interaction suggests that different results are obtained from combining levels of inhibitory response (pre-test, post-test, and follow-up) and group levels (control and experimental). The between-group analysis of variance, based on observed means, reveals a significant difference between the two groups (P<0.001; F=95.36), indicating a significant effect of the experiment on the experimental group. Finally, a Bonferroni follow-up test was employed to determine which two intervals differ significantly among the three-test means. Table 1. Bonferroni Analysis Result of Inhibitory Response <table class="MsoTableGrid" style="border-collapse:collapse; border:none"> <tbody> <tr> <td style="border-bottom:1px solid black; width:156px; padding:0in 7px 0in 7px; border-top:1px solid black; border-right:1px solid black; border-left:1px solid black">Group</td> <td style="border-bottom:1px solid black; width:156px; padding:0in 7px 0in 7px; border-top:1px solid black; border-right:1px solid black; border-left:none">Group</td> <td style="border-bottom:1px solid black; width:156px; padding:0in 7px 0in 7px; border-top:1px solid black; border-right:1px solid black; border-left:none">Average different</td> <td style="border-bottom:1px solid black; width:156px; padding:0in 7px 0in 7px; border-top:1px solid black; border-right:1px solid black; border-left:none">P</td> </tr> <tr> <td rowspan="2" style="border-bottom:1px solid black; width:156px; padding:0in 7px 0in 7px; border-top:none; border-right:1px solid black; border-left:1px solid black">Pre-test</td> <td style="border-bottom:1px solid black; width:156px; padding:0in 7px 0in 7px; border-top:none; border-right:1px solid black; border-left:none">Post-test</td> <td style="border-bottom:1px solid black; width:156px; padding:0in 7px 0in 7px; border-top:none; border-right:1px solid black; border-left:none">3.53</td> <td style="border-bottom:1px solid black; width:156px; padding:0in 7px 0in 7px; border-top:none; border-right:1px solid black; border-left:none">0.001</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="border-bottom:1px solid black; width:156px; padding:0in 7px 0in 7px; border-top:none; border-right:1px solid black; border-left:none">Follow-up</td> <td style="border-bottom:1px solid black; width:156px; padding:0in 7px 0in 7px; border-top:none; border-right:1px solid black; border-left:none">5.77</td> <td style="border-bottom:1px solid black; width:156px; padding:0in 7px 0in 7px; border-top:none; border-right:1px solid black; border-left:none">0.001</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="border-bottom:1px solid black; width:156px; padding:0in 7px 0in 7px; border-top:none; border-right:1px solid black; border-left:1px solid black">Post-test</td> <td style="border-bottom:1px solid black; width:156px; padding:0in 7px 0in 7px; border-top:none; border-right:1px solid black; border-left:none">Follow-up</td> <td style="border-bottom:1px solid black; width:156px; padding:0in 7px 0in 7px; border-top:none; border-right:1px solid black; border-left:none">2.24</td> <td style="border-bottom:1px solid black; width:156px; padding:0in 7px 0in 7px; border-top:none; border-right:1px solid black; border-left:none">0.001</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> The analysis revealed significant differences between pre-test and post-test scores (P<0.001), pre-test and follow-up scores (P<0.001), and post-test and follow-up scores (P<0.001). Therefore, the research hypothesis regarding the impact of executive functions on inhibitory response in preschool children was confirmed for both the post-test and follow-up periods. Conclusion The primary objective of this research was to develop an executive functions educational package and determine its impact on inhibitory response in 5-6-year-old preschool children. Improvements in executive functions during the pre-school years occur due to physiological changes in the brain, specifically in the pre-frontal cortex, and this region’s increased connectivity and integration with other brain areas. While the physiological reasons behind the development of executive abilities have been somewhat clarified, less attention has been paid to the influence of environmental factors on the development of these skills during this age period. Additionally, limited studies have focused on developing educational packages targeting executive functions and examining their effect specifically on the preschool age group. In this research, the program content is based on Barkley’s approach, emphasizing exercises such as emotional recognition, appropriate expression and management, understanding others’ perspectives, proper interaction in social situations, and ultimately, exercises in inhibitory response and thinking before acting. The research results indicate the effectiveness of the educational intervention. Moreover, ten experts in the executive function field have endorsed the educational package’s validity. However, the role of age ensures the sustained positive effects of cognitive interventions, in addition to the continuation of educational exercises. Vas et al.’s research findings have shown that the effectiveness of cognitive training is more impactful and enduring when children are in the early stages of growth and early childhood. Ethical Considerations Compliance with ethical guidelines The conditions of this research were such that no mental or physical damage existed to the study participants. Besides, the current research has followed the ethical principles that include obtaining informed consent and the principle of secrecy of the participants for the confidentiality of their information. Furthermore, in this research, the subjects were given sufficient information about conducting the research, and the participants were free to withdraw. Authors’ contributions All authors were involved in topic selection, study design, concept definition, data collection, analysis, writing, and article drafting. All authors also studied and approved the article’s final version. Funding The present research received no funding from any financing organization. Acknowledgments In the end, the authors are grateful to all participants in the research and to all those who have facilitated its implementation. Conflict of interest The author has not reported any conflict of interest. کارکردهای اجرایی, بازداری پاسخ, کودکان پیش‌دبستان Executive functions, Response inhibition, Preschool children 40 55 http://icssjournal.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-1819-1&slc_lang=fa&sid=1 Sahar Shariati سحر شریعتی 100319475328460017595 0009-0006-0388-3904 No PhD Student of the Department of Educational Psychology, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran دانشجوی دکتری روان‌شناسی تربیتی، واحد علوم و تحقیقات، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، تهران، ایران Alireza Kiamanesh علیرضا کیامنش Kiamanesh@khu.ac.ir 100319475328460017596 100319475328460017596 Yes Professor, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran استاد گروه روان‌شناسی، دانشکده روان‌شناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران Valiollah Farzad ولی‌الله فرزاد 100319475328460017597 100319475328460017597 No Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran دانشیار گروه روان‌شناسی، دانشکده روان‌شناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه خوارزمی، تهران، ایران