Evaluating the Relation Between CHC Cognitive Factors and Selected Components of Executive Functioning

  • Lemann E
  • Davis A
  • Finch W
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Executive functioning remains an elusive paradigm in regard to their underlying constructs. The Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory of cognitive functions is the predominant theory of the measurement of human intelligence in psychology in regard to test construction and interpretation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relations between components of the Tower Test and Color-Word Interference Test from the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS) and CHC theory, as measured by the Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Abilities (WJ-III-COG). Participants were 64 undergraduate students (women, n = 38; men, n = 26), with a mean age of 19.88 years. Results of a Structured Equation Model indicated a correlation between the two factors modeled for Intelligence and Executive functioning was estimated to be 0.575 (0.331), and was statistically significant (p < .001), with a 95% credible interval of (0.551, 0.599). Thus, approximately 33% of the variance for measures of Intelligence was accounted for by measures of Executive Functioning; the biggest CHC contributor was Numbers Reversed which argues for the importance of attention and working memory being an important component of executive functioning. The results suggest that despite a relation between some components of executive function and cognitive ability, much variance between the D-KEFS and WJ-III-COG remains unaccounted for. These findings have implications for evaluation and intervention planning within vocational and educational settings.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lemann, E. R., Davis, A. S., Finch, W. H., & Pierson, E. E. (2019). Evaluating the Relation Between CHC Cognitive Factors and Selected Components of Executive Functioning. Journal of Pediatric Neuropsychology, 5(4), 152–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40817-019-00073-3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free