| Literature DB >> 32300319 |
Gina Austin1, Rebecca Bondü1,2, Birgit Elsner1.
Abstract
Studies show relations between executive function (EF), Theory of Mind (ToM), and conduct-problem (CP) symptoms. However, many studies have involved cross-sectional data, small clinical samples, pre-school children, and/or did not consider potential mediation effects. The present study examined the longitudinal relations between EF, ToM abilities, and CP symptoms in a population-based sample of 1,657 children between 6 and 11 years (T1: M = 8.3 years, T2: M = 9.1 years; 51.9% girls). We assessed EF skills and ToM abilities via computerized tasks at first measurement (T1), CP symptoms were rated via parent questionnaires at T1 and approximately 1 year later (T2). Structural-equation models showed a negative relation between T1 EF and T2 CP symptoms even when controlling for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms and other variables. This relation was fully mediated by T1 ToM abilities. The study shows how children's abilities to control their thoughts and behaviors and to understand others' mental states interact in the development of CP symptoms.Entities:
Keywords: conduct-problem symptoms; executive functions; longitudinal; middle childhood; theory of mind
Year: 2020 PMID: 32300319 PMCID: PMC7144567 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00539
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Descriptive statistics of CP symptoms, ToM, EF measures, and control variables.
| Range | α1 | T1 | T2 | ||||
| CP symptoms | 1–3 | 0.75/0.73 | 1.36 | 0.37 | 1.33 | 0.34 | 1.2 |
| ToMa | 0–4 | 0.62 | 3.57 | 0.72 | |||
| Flexibility | 0–22 | 15.57 | 4.68 | ||||
| Inhibitionb | 0–89c | 24.95 | 8.78 | ||||
| Working memory | 0–16 | 6.27 | 1.42 | ||||
| ADHD symptoms | 1–3 | 0.80 | 1.64 | 0.47 | |||
| Fluid intelligenced | 27–80c | 51.38 | 9.26 | ||||
| Age | 6–11 | 8.38 | 0.95 | ||||
FIGURE 1Percentage of mean parent ratings of T1 (black) and T2 (gray) CP symptoms (range: 1–3).
Zero-order correlations of CP symptoms, ToM, EF measures, and control variables (upper figures) and partial correlations controlled for age (lower figures).
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ||
| 1 | CP symptoms T1 | 0.609*** | −0.015*** | −0.127*** | 0.095*** | −0.098*** | 0.521*** | −0.090*** | 0.010*** | |
| 2 | CP symptoms T2 | 0.597*** | −0.074*** | −0.146*** | 0.109*** | −0.074*** | 0.374*** | −0.040*** | 0.012*** | |
| 3 | ToM | –0.038 | −0.068* | 0.112*** | −0.088*** | 0.069*** | −0.005*** | 0.052*** | 0.096*** | |
| 4 | Flexibility | −0.134*** | −0.151*** | 0.055 | −0.328*** | 0.357*** | −0.180*** | 0.157*** | 0.276*** | |
| 5 | Inhibitiona | 0.150*** | 0.118*** | –0.045 | −0.247*** | −0.272*** | 0.162*** | −0.263*** | −0.347*** | |
| 6 | Working memory | −0.103*** | −0.068* | 0.008 | 0.293*** | −0.188*** | −0.121*** | 0.131*** | 0.239*** | |
| 7 | ADHD symptoms | 0.505*** | 0.367*** | –0.024 | −0.202*** | 0.202*** | −0.121*** | −0.166*** | 0.031*** | |
| 8 | Fluid intelligenceb | −0.115*** | –0.041 | 00.49 | 0.183*** | −0.310*** | 0.094** | −0.182*** | −0.069*** | |
| 9 | Age |
FIGURE 2Structural equation model for the prediction of T2 CP symptoms from T1 EF mediated by T1 ToM and controlled for age, gender, fluid intelligence, and ADHD Symptoms. Digits in bracket: Effect of T1 EF on T2 CP symptoms without controlling for the mediating effect of T1 ToM. Correlation between T1 predictors allowed and estimated, but not displayed in the figure. Non-standardized path coefficients in square braquets. χ2(135) = 229.814, p < 0.001, CFI = 0.970, RMSEA = 0.021, WRMR = 0.963, R2 CP = 0.666. ∗p = 0.05, ∗∗p = 0.01, ***p = 0.001.