Cognitive and Linguistic Contributors to Reading-Specific Executive Function in Diverse Learners

• In Event: Poster Session 14
  In Poster Session: PS 14 Topic - Language, Communication

Abstract

Though executive functions (EF) contribute to reading comprehension, research is needed to explain these contributions (Butterfuss & Kendeou, 2018). Reading requires executive coordination of multiple text features, such as orthographic, phonological, and semantic information (Perfetti & Stafura, 2014). Accordingly, recent work has explored contributions of a reading-specific EF, graphophonological-semantic cognitive flexibility (GSF) to reading. GSF indicates the ability to coordinate flexibly the graphophonic and semantic features of print and contributes significantly to reading comprehension in typically developing English speaking (ES) children (Cartwright, 2002; Cartwright et al., 2010), French-speaking children (Colé et al., 2014), Danish-speaking children (Knudsen et al., 2018) and ES adults (Cartwright, 2007; Cartwright et al., 2020) beyond other EFs, vocabulary, and word reading. GSF is significantly lower in children (Cartwright, Coppage et al., 2017) and adults (Cartwright, Bock et al., 2017) with reading comprehension deficits (RCD). Further, GSF training improves reading for typically developing ES (Cartwright, 2002), teacher-identified ES struggling readers (Cartwright et al., 2020), and ES with RCD (Cartwright et al., 2017) whose pattern of reading difficulties is similar to that evinced by emergent bilingual students (EB): age-appropriate word reading with comparably poor reading comprehension (Mancilla-Martinez & Lesaux, 2010).

Understanding the cognitive-linguistic bases of GSF may point to reasons for its facilitation of reading. GSF is a complex EF task that involves the rapid (timed) coordination of orthographic, phonological, and semantic information associated with print. Domain-general cognitive flexibility recruits other executive function skills, such as inhibition and working memory (Friedman & Miyake, 2017). And, given the timed nature of the GSF task, rapid automatic naming (RAN) may partially underlie GSF and its contributions to reading (Wolf, 1986). Further, because EB students are much like students with RCD, exploring whether they have deficits in GSF may point to directions for EF interventions with these students.

We assessed 535 3rd to 5th grade ES (N=204) and EB (N=331) 3rd to 5th grade children on word reading, vocabulary, RAN, working memory, inhibition, domain-general cognitive flexibility, and GSF. Further, we compared GSF across ES and EB students to determine whether GSF differs by language group. A hierarchical regression predicting GSF, controlling for grade level, indicated word reading, inhibition, and domain general cognitive flexibility contributed significant, unique variance to GSF in the full sample, R-squared=.86, p < .001. These results held in ES students, R-squared= .85, p < .001. But, for EB, only domain-general cognitive flexibility emerged as a significant predictor of GSF, R-squared= .87, p < .001. An ANCOVA controlling for grade indicated no significant differences between EB (M= 12.46, SE= .47) and ES (M= 13.76, SE= .56) on GSF, F(1, 532) =3.38, p= .066), though ES scored slightly higher than EB. However, when word reading and vocabulary were controlled, EB (M= 14.14, SE= .38) outperformed ES (M=11.05, SE= .49) on GSF, F(1, 561)=22.05, p < .001, consistent with bilingual EF advantages observed in other work(Bialystok & Barac, 2012). Findings suggest differential patterns of reading-specific EF development across language groups.

Authors

• Kelly B Cartwright, Christopher Newport University
  Presenting Author

• Ana Taboada Barber, University of Maryland
  Non-Presenting Author

• Casey J Archer, University of Maryland
  Non-Presenting Author