Repository logo
 

Efficiency of Executive Function: A Two-Generation Cross-Cultural Comparison of Samples From Hong Kong and the United Kingdom.

Accepted version
Peer-reviewed

Type

Article

Change log

Authors

Ellefson, Michelle R 
Ng, Florrie Fei-Yin 
Wang, Qian 

Abstract

Although Asian preschoolers acquire executive functions (EFs) earlier than their Western counterparts, little is known about whether this advantage persists into later childhood and adulthood. To address this gap, in the current study we gave four computerized EF tasks (providing measures of inhibition, working memory, cognitive flexibility, and planning) to a large sample ( n = 1,427) of 9- to 16-year-olds and their parents. All participants lived in either the United Kingdom or Hong Kong. Our findings highlight the importance of combining developmental and cultural perspectives and show both similarities and contrasts across sites. Specifically, adults' EF performance did not differ between the two sites; age-related changes in executive function for both the children and the parents appeared to be culturally invariant, as did a modest intergenerational correlation. In contrast, school-age children and young adolescents in Hong Kong outperformed their United Kingdom counterparts on all four EF tasks, a difference consistent with previous findings from preschool children.

Description

Keywords

cognitive flexibility, cross-cultural research, executive functions, inhibition, open data, open materials, planning, working memory, Adolescent, Adult, Child, Child Development, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Executive Function, Female, Hong Kong, Humans, Inhibition, Psychological, Intergenerational Relations, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Parents, United Kingdom

Journal Title

Psychol Sci

Conference Name

Journal ISSN

0956-7976
1467-9280

Volume Title

28

Publisher

SAGE Publications
Sponsorship
United States Department of Education (R305A110932)
Economic and Social Research Council (ES/K010255/1)
A joint-council award to the authors funded this research (ES/K010225/1:Economic and Social Research Council, Research Grants Council of Hong Kong). Thinking Games website development supported by the Institute of Educational Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305A110932 to the University of Cambridge. Electronic access to dataset: http://reshare.ukdataservice.ac.uk/851984/.