» Articles » PMID: 37668562

Associations Between Executive Functions Assessed in Different Contexts in a Genetically Informative Sample

Overview
Specialty Psychology
Date 2023 Sep 5
PMID 37668562
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Executive functions (EFs) are cognitive functions that help direct goal-related behavior. EFs are usually measured via behavioral tasks assessed in highly controlled laboratory settings under the supervision of a research assistant. Online versions of EF tasks are an increasingly popular alternative to in-lab testing. However, researchers do not have the same control over the testing environment during online EF assessments. To assess the extent to which EFs assessed in-lab and online are related, we used data from the Colorado Online Twin Study (CoTwins; 887 individual twins aged 13.98-19.05) and constructed an Lab Common EF factor and an Online Common EF factor from four EF tasks assessed in-lab and online. The Lab Common and Online Common EF factors were genetically identical (A = 1.00) but phenotypically separable ( = .77, 95% confidence interval [0.59, 0.94]) indicating that these EF factors have the same genetic underpinnings but may be differentially influenced by environmental factors. We examined phenotypic, genetic, and environmental correlations between the EF factors and a general cognitive ability factor (g) assessed in the lab and found similar relationships between Lab Common EF and g and Online Common EF and g. Overall, these results suggest that Common EF factors assessed in different contexts are highly related to each other and similarly related to other cognitive outcomes. These findings indicate that online task-based EF assessments could be a viable strategy for increasing sample sizes in large-scale studies, particularly genetically informed studies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Citing Articles

GenomicSEM Modelling of Diverse Executive Function GWAS Improves Gene Discovery.

Perry L, Chevalier N, Luciano M Behav Genet. 2025; 55(2):71-85.

PMID: 39891803 PMC: 11882726. DOI: 10.1007/s10519-025-10214-4.


Associations between executive functions assessed in different contexts in a genetically informative sample.

M Freis S, Alexander J, Anderson J, Corley R, De La Vega A, Gustavson D J Exp Psychol Gen. 2023; 153(1):70-85.

PMID: 37668562 PMC: 10843656. DOI: 10.1037/xge0001471.

References
1.
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

2.
Crump M, McDonnell J, Gureckis T . Evaluating Amazon's Mechanical Turk as a tool for experimental behavioral research. PLoS One. 2013; 8(3):e57410. PMC: 3596391. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0057410. View

3.
M Freis S, Alexander J, Anderson J, Corley R, De La Vega A, Gustavson D . Associations between executive functions assessed in different contexts in a genetically informative sample. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2023; 153(1):70-85. PMC: 10843656. DOI: 10.1037/xge0001471. View

4.
Mayr U, Kliegl R . Task-set switching and long-term memory retrieval. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2000; 26(5):1124-40. DOI: 10.1037//0278-7393.26.5.1124. View

5.
M Freis S, Morrison C, Lessem J, Hewitt J, Friedman N . Genetic and environmental influences on executive functions and intelligence in middle childhood. Dev Sci. 2021; 25(1):e13150. PMC: 8639807. DOI: 10.1111/desc.13150. View