Despite overlapping terminology and assumptions that they tap the same constructs, executive function (EF) task performance and EF/effortful control (EC) questionnaires have been reported to be only weakly correlated. It is unclear if this reflects true lack of association or methodological limitations. The current study addresses past methodological limitations using a preregistered latent variable approach in a community youth sample (N = 291, age 13-22 years). EF task performance was assessed with a well-validated battery inhibition, shifting, and updating tasks. Self-reported EF/EC was assessed using the predominant temperament measure (Early Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire–Revised [EATQ-R]), and a self-report assessment more closely aligned with EF constructs (Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function–Self-Report [BRIEF-SR]). Bifactor models fit the BRIEF-SR, EATQ-R and EF task measures well. Self-reported EF/EC and EF task factors were only weakly correlated on average in youth, although there were some stronger associations in older youth. These results suggest that task-based measures of EF and self-report measures of EF/EC may be best viewed as complementary, but largely distinct, windows on cognitive control.
BaddeleyA. D.RepovsG. (2006). The multi-component model of working memory: Explorations in experimental cognitive psychology. Neuroscience, 139(1), 5-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2005.12.061
2.
BarkleyR. A.FischerM. (2011). Predicting impairment in major life activities and occupational functioning in hyperactive children as adults: Self-reported executive function (EF) deficits versus EF tests. Developmental Neuropsychology, 36(2), 137-161. https://doi.org/10.1080/87565641.2010.549877
3.
BenjaminiY.KriegerA. M.YekutieliD. (2006). Adaptive linear step-up procedures that control the false discovery rate. Biometrika, 93(3), 491-507. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/93.3.491
4.
BestJ. R.MillerP. H.JonesL. L. (2009). Executive functions after age 5: Changes and correlates. Developmental Review, 29(3), 180-200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2009.05.002
5.
BornovalovaM. A.ChoateA. M.FatimahH.PetersenK. J.WiernikB. M. (2020). Appropriate use of bifactor analysis in psychopathology research: Appreciating benefits and limitations. Biological Psychiatry, 88(1) 18-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2020.01.013
6.
BridgettD. J.OddiK. B.LaakeL. M.MurdockK. W.BachmannM. N. (2013). Integrating and differentiating aspects of self-regulation: Effortful control, executive functioning, and links to negative affectivity. Emotion, 13(1), 47-63. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029536
7.
ChathamC. H.ClausE. D.KimA.CurranT.BanichM. T.MunakataY. (2012). Cognitive control reflects context monitoring, not motoric stopping, in response inhibition. PLOS ONE, 7(2), Article e31546. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0031546
DuckworthA. L.KernM. L. (2011). A meta-analysis of the convergent validity of self-control measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 45(3), 259-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2011.02.004
10.
DueberD. M. (2017). Bifactor indices calculator: A Microsoft Excel-based tool to calculate various indices relevant to bifactor CFA models. https://doi.org/10.13023/edp.tool.01
11.
DuncanJ.OwenA. M. (2000). Common regions of the human frontal lobe recruited by diverse cognitive demands. Trends in Neurosciences, 23(10), 475-483. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-2236(00)01633-7
Else-QuestN. M.HydeJ. S.GoldsmithH. H.Van HulleC. A. (2006). Gender differences in temperament: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 132(1), 33-72. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.1.33
14.
EngleR. W.KaneM. J. (2003). Executive attention, working memory capacity, and a two-factor theory of cognitive control. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 44, 145-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0079-7421(03)44005-x
15.
FriedmanN. P.HatoumA. S.GustavsonD. E.CorleyR. P.HewittJ. K.YoungS. E. (2020). Executive functions and impulsivity are genetically distinct and independently predict psychopathology: Results from two adult twin studies. Clinical Psychological Science, 8(3), 519-538. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702619898814
16.
FriedmanN. P.MiyakeA. (2017). Unity and diversity of executive functions: Individual differences as a window on cognitive structure. Cortex, 86(January), 186-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2016.04.023
17.
FriedmanN. P.MiyakeA.AltamiranoL. J.CorleyR. P.YoungS. E.RheaS. A.HewittJ. K. (2016). Stability and change in executive function abilities from late adolescence to early adulthood: A longitudinal twin study. Developmental Psychology, 52(2), 326-340. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000075
18.
FriedmanN. P.MiyakeA.YoungS. E.DeFriesJ. C.CorleyR. P.HewittJ. K. (2008). Individual differences in executive functions are almost entirely genetic in origin. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137(2), 201-225. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.137.2.201
19.
FriedmanN. P.Pont duA.CorleyR. P.HewittJ. K. (2018). Longitudinal relations between depressive symptoms and executive functions from adolescence to early adulthood: A twin study. Clinical Psychological Science, 6(4), 543-560. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702618766360
20.
GioiaG. A.IsquithP. K.RetzlaffP. D.EspyK. A. (2002). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) in a clinical sample. Child Neuropsychology, 8(4), 249-257. https://doi.org/10.1076/chin.8.4.249.13513
21.
GrissomN. M.ReyesT. M. (2018). Let’s call the whole thing off: Evaluating gender and sex differences in executive function. Neuropsychopharmacology, 44(1), 86-96. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-018-0179-5
22.
GustavsonD. E.MiyakeA.HewittJ. K.FriedmanN. P. (2015). Understanding the cognitive and genetic underpinnings of procrastination: Evidence for shared genetic influences with goal management and executive function abilities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(6), 1063-1079. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000110
23.
GustavsonD. E.PanizzonM. S.FranzC. E.FriedmanN. P.ReynoldsC. A.JacobsonK. C.XianH.LyonsM. J.KremenW. S. (2018). Genetic and environmental architecture of executive functions in midlife. Neuropsychology, 32(1), 18-30. https://doi.org/10.1037/neu0000389
24.
GustavsonD. E.StallingsM. C.CorleyR. P.MiyakeA.HewittJ. K.FriedmanN. P. (2017). Executive functions and substance use: Relations in late adolescence and early adulthood. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 126(2), 257-270. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000250
25.
GuyS. C.GioiaG. A.IsquithP. K. (2004). Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function: Self-report Version. Psychological Assessment Inc.
26.
HankinB. L.YoungJ. F.AbelaJ. R. Z.SmolenA.JennessJ. L.GulleyL. D.TechnowJ. R.GottliebA. B.CohenJ. R.OppenheimerC. W. (2015). Depression from childhood into late adolescence: Influence of gender, development, genetic susceptibility, and peer stress. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 124(4), 803-816. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000089
27.
HuL. T.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
28.
HuizingaM.DolanC. V.van der MolenM. W. (2006). Age-related change in executive function: Developmental trends and a latent variable analysis. Neuropsychologia, 44(11), 2017-2036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.01.010
29.
ItoT. A.FriedmanN. P.BartholowB. D.CorrellJ.LoerschC.AltamiranoL. J.MiyakeA. (2015). Toward a comprehensive understanding of executive cognitive function in implicit racial bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(2), 187-218. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038557
LambertsK. F.EvansJ. J.SpikmanJ. M. (2010). A real-life, ecologically valid test of executive functioning: The executive secretarial task. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 32(1), 56-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803390902806550
32.
LoganG. D.CowanW. B. (1984). On the ability to inhibit thought and action: A theory of an act of control. Psychological Review, 91(3), 295-327. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.91.3.295
33.
MalanchiniM.EngelhardtL. E.GrotzingerA.HardenK. P.Tucker-DrobE. M. (2018). “Same but different”: Associations between multiple aspects of self-regulation, cognition and academic abilities. Behavior Genetics, 117(6), 1164-1188. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000224
34.
MiyakeA.FriedmanN. P.EmersonM. J.WitzkiA. H.HowerterA.WagerT. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 49-100. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734
35.
MoffittT. E.ArseneaultL.BelskyD. W.DicksonN.HancoxR. J.HarringtonH.HoutsR.PoultonR.RobertsB. W.RossS.SearsM. R.ThomsonW. M.CaspiA. (2011). A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public safety. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(7), 2693-2698. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1010076108
36.
MullinB. C.PerksE. L.HaradenD. A.SnyderH. R.HankinB. L. (2020). Subjective executive function weaknesses are linked to elevated internalizing symptoms among community adolescents. Assessment, 27(3), 560-571. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191118820133
37.
MurisP.MeestersC. (2009). Reactive and regulative temperament in youths: Psychometric evaluation of the Early Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire-revised. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 31(1), 7-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-008-9089-x
38.
MurisP.MeestersC.BlijlevensP. (2007). Self-reported reactive and regulative temperament in early adolescence: Relations to internalizing and externalizing problem behavior and “Big Three” personality factors. Journal of Adolescence, 30(6), 1035-1049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2007.03.003
39.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (2017). Mplus version 8 user’s guide. Muthén & Muthén.
40.
NęckaE.GruszkaA.OrzechowskiJ.NowakM.WójcikN. (2018). The (in)significance of executive functions for the trait of self-control: A psychometric study. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 219. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01139
41.
Pérez-SalasC. P.RamosC.OlivaK.OrtegaA. (2016). Bifactor modeling of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) in a Chilean sample. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 122(3), 757-776. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031512516650441
42.
PutnamS. P.EllisL. K.RothbartM. K. (2001). The structure of temperament from infancy through adolescence. In EliaszA.AngleitnerA. (Eds.), Advances in research on temperament (pp. 165-182). Pabst Science.
43.
ReimannZ.MillerJ. R.DahleK. M.HooperA. P.YoungA. M.GoatesM. C.MagnussonB. M.CrandallA. (2018). Executive functions and health behaviors associated with the leading causes of death in the United States: A systematic review. Journal of Health Psychology, 25(2), 186-196. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105318800829
44.
RodriguezA.ReiseS. P.HavilandM. G. (2016). Evaluating bifactor models: Calculating and interpreting statistical indices. Psychological Methods, 21(2), 137-150. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000045
45.
RothR. M.LanceC. E.IsquithP. K.FischerA. S.GiancolaP. R. (2013). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function–Adult Version in healthy adults and application to attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 28(5), 425-434. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/act031
46.
RothbartM. K.BatesE. A. (2006). Temperament. In DamonW.EisenbergN.LernerR. M. (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology, social, emotional, and personality development (Vol. 3, 6 ed., pp. 99-166). Wiley.
ShulmanE. P.SmithA. R.SilvaK.IcenogleG.DuellN.CheinJ. M.SteinbergL. (2015). The dual systems model: Review, reappraisal, and reaffirmation. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(February), 103-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2015.12.010
49.
SnyderH. R.FriedmanN. P.HankinB. L. (2019). Transdiagnostic mechanisms of psychopathology in youth: Executive functions, dependent Stress, and rumination. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 43(5), 834-851. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-019-10016-z
50.
SnyderH. R.GulleyL. D.BijttebierP.HartmanC. A.OldehinkelA. J.MezulisA.YoungJ. F.HankinB. L. (2015). Adolescent emotionality and effortful control: Core latent constructs and links to psychopathology and functioning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(6), 1132-1149. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000047
51.
SnyderH. R.MiyakeA.HankinB. L. (2015). Advancing understanding of executive function impairments and psychopathology: Bridging the gap between clinical and cognitive approaches. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00328
52.
StuckyB. D.EdelenM. O. (2015). Using hierarchical IRT models to create unidimensional measures from multidimensional data. In ReiseS. P.RevickiD. A. (Eds.), Handbook of item response theory modeling: Applications to typical performance assessment (pp.183-206). Routledge.
53.
TiegoJ.BellgroveM. A.WhittleS.PantelisC.TestaR. (2020). Common mechanisms of executive attention underlie executive function and effortful control in children. Developmental Science, 23(3), Article e12918. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12918
54.
ToplakM. E.WestR. F.StanovichK. E. (2012). Practitioner review: Do performance-based measures and ratings of executive function assess the same construct?Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54(2), 131-143. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12001
55.
VerstraetenK.VaseyM. W.ClaesL.BijttebierP. (2010). The assessment of effortful control in childhood: Questionnaires and the test of everyday attention for children compared. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(1), 59-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.08.016
56.
WilcoxR. R.KeselmanH. J. (2003). Modern robust data analysis methods: Measures of central tendency. Psychological Methods, 8(3), 254-274. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.8.3.254
57.
ZhouQ.ChenS. H.MainA. (2012). Commonalities and differences in the research on children’s effortful control and executive function: A call for an integrated model of self-regulation. Child Development Perspectives, 6(2), 112-121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2011.00176.x
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
