Do Rating and Task Measures of Control Abilities Assess the Same Thing?

Overview

Journal Curr Dir Psychol Sci

Specialty Psychology

Date 2022 Aug 5

PMID 35928929

Authors

Naomi P Friedman

Daniel E Gustavson

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The ability to control our thoughts and actions is broadly associated with health and success, so it is unsurprising that measuring self-control abilities is a common goal across many areas of psychology. Puzzlingly, however, different measures of control - questionnaire ratings and computerized cognitive tasks - show only weak relationships to each other. We review evidence that this discrepancy is not just a result of poor reliability or validity of ratings or tasks. Rather, ratings and tasks seem to assess different aspects of control, distinguishable along six main dimensions. To improve the psychological science surrounding self-control, it will be important for future work to investigate the relative importance of these dimensions to the dissociations between self-control measures, and for researchers to motivate and explain which aspects of control they are studying when one or both types of measures are deployed. Keywords: cognitive control, executive function, self-regulation, self-control, impulsivity.

Citing Articles

The Memory and Affective Flexibility Task: a new behavioral tool to assess neurocognitive processes implicated in emotion-related impulsivity and internalizing symptoms.

Allen K, Elliott M, Ronold E, Rajgopal N, Hammar A, Johnson S Front Psychiatry. 2025; 16:1456691.

PMID: 39950173 PMC: 11823637. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1456691.

Executive Function and Impulsivity Predict Distinct Genetic Variance in Internalizing Problems, Externalizing Problems, Thought Disorders, and Compulsive Disorders: A Genomic Structural Equation Modeling Study.

Gustavson D, Morrison C, Mallard T, Jennings M, Fontanillas P, Elson S Clin Psychol Sci. 2024; 12(5):865-881.

PMID: 39323941 PMC: 11423426. DOI: 10.1177/21677026231207845.

A meta-analysis on the relationship between subjective cognitive failures as measured by the cognitive failures questionnaire (CFQ) and objective performance on executive function tasks.

Goodhew S, Edwards M Psychon Bull Rev. 2024; .

PMID: 39249726 DOI: 10.3758/s13423-024-02573-6.

A d factor? Understanding trait distractibility and its relationships with ADHD symptomatology and hyperfocus.

Zhang H, Miyake A, Osborne J, Shah P, Jonides J PLoS One. 2023; 18(10):e0292215.

PMID: 37878578 PMC: 10599552. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0292215.

The Longitudinal Interplay between Adverse Peer Experiences and Self-Regulation Facets: A Prospective Analysis during Middle Childhood.

Westermann N, Busching R, Klein A, Warschburger P Res Child Adolesc Psychopathol. 2023; 52(2):293-308.

PMID: 37782355 PMC: 10937773. DOI: 10.1007/s10802-023-01117-1.

References

Friedman N, Hatoum A, Gustavson D, Corley R, Hewitt J, Young S . Executive Functions and Impulsivity are Genetically Distinct and Independently Predict Psychopathology: Results from Two Adult Twin Studies. Clin Psychol Sci. 2021; 8(3):519-538. PMC: 7983400. DOI: 10.1177/2167702619898814. View

Duckworth A, Kern M . A Meta-Analysis of the Convergent Validity of Self-Control Measures. J Res Pers. 2011; 45(3):259-268. PMC: 3105910. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrp.2011.02.004. View

Toplak M, West R, Stanovich K . Practitioner review: do performance-based measures and ratings of executive function assess the same construct?. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2012; 54(2):131-43. DOI: 10.1111/jcpp.12001. View

Hofmann W, Baumeister R, Forster G, Vohs K . Everyday temptations: an experience sampling study of desire, conflict, and self-control. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2011; 102(6):1318-35. DOI: 10.1037/a0026545. View

Diamond A . Executive functions. Annu Rev Psychol. 2012; 64:135-68. PMC: 4084861. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750. View

Gustavson D, Panizzon M, Elman J, Franz C, Reynolds C, Jacobson K . Stability of genetic and environmental influences on executive functions in midlife. Psychol Aging. 2018; 33(2):219-231. PMC: 5905725. DOI: 10.1037/pag0000230. View

Kamradt J, Ullsperger J, Nikolas M . Executive function assessment and adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: tasks versus ratings on the Barkley deficits in executive functioning scale. Psychol Assess. 2014; 26(4):1095-105. DOI: 10.1037/pas0000006. View

Gustavson D, Stallings M, Corley R, Miyake A, Hewitt J, Friedman N . Executive functions and substance use: Relations in late adolescence and early adulthood. J Abnorm Psychol. 2017; 126(2):257-270. PMC: 5305429. DOI: 10.1037/abn0000250. View

Dang J, King K, Inzlicht M . Why Are Self-Report and Behavioral Measures Weakly Correlated?. Trends Cogn Sci. 2020; 24(4):267-269. PMC: 7977810. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2020.01.007. View

10.

Enkavi A, Eisenberg I, Bissett P, Mazza G, MacKinnon D, Marsch L . Large-scale analysis of test-retest reliabilities of self-regulation measures. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019; 116(12):5472-5477. PMC: 6431228. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1818430116. View

11.

Verdejo-Garcia A, Tiego J, Kakoschke N, Moskovsky N, Voigt K, Anderson A . A unified online test battery for cognitive impulsivity reveals relationships with real-world impulsive behaviours. Nat Hum Behav. 2021; 5(11):1562-1577. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-021-01127-3. View

12.

Galla B, Duckworth A . More than resisting temptation: Beneficial habits mediate the relationship between self-control and positive life outcomes. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2015; 109(3):508-25. PMC: 4731333. DOI: 10.1037/pspp0000026. View

13.

Sharma L, Markon K, Clark L . Toward a theory of distinct types of "impulsive" behaviors: A meta-analysis of self-report and behavioral measures. Psychol Bull. 2013; 140(2):374-408. DOI: 10.1037/a0034418. View

14.

de Ridder D, Lensvelt-Mulders G, Finkenauer C, Stok F, Baumeister R . Taking stock of self-control: a meta-analysis of how trait self-control relates to a wide range of behaviors. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2011; 16(1):76-99. DOI: 10.1177/1088868311418749. View

15.

Friedman N, Miyake A . Unity and diversity of executive functions: Individual differences as a window on cognitive structure. Cortex. 2016; 86:186-204. PMC: 5104682. DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2016.04.023. View

16.

Eisenberg I, Bissett P, Enkavi A, Li J, MacKinnon D, Marsch L . Uncovering the structure of self-regulation through data-driven ontology discovery. Nat Commun. 2019; 10(1):2319. PMC: 6534563. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-10301-1. View

17.

Rey-Mermet A, Gade M, Oberauer K . Should we stop thinking about inhibition? Searching for individual and age differences in inhibition ability. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2017; 44(4):501-526. DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000450. View

18.

Snyder H, Miyake A, Hankin B . Advancing understanding of executive function impairments and psychopathology: bridging the gap between clinical and cognitive approaches. Front Psychol. 2015; 6:328. PMC: 4374537. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00328. View

19.

Barkley R, Fischer M . Predicting impairment in major life activities and occupational functioning in hyperactive children as adults: self-reported executive function (EF) deficits versus EF tests. Dev Neuropsychol. 2011; 36(2):137-61. DOI: 10.1080/87565641.2010.549877. View

20.

Hedge C, Powell G, Sumner P . The reliability paradox: Why robust cognitive tasks do not produce reliable individual differences. Behav Res Methods. 2017; 50(3):1166-1186. PMC: 5990556. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-017-0935-1. View