Cited by 102Psychometric Methodologies and TestingDevelopmental and Educational NeuropsychologyCognitive Abilities and Testing

Contributions of modern measurement theory to measuring executive function in early childhood: An empirical demonstration

Open access
Willoughby, Michael T., Wirth, R.J., Blair, Clancy B.·2011·Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

Abstract

This study demonstrates the merits of evaluating a newly developed battery of executive function tasks, designed for use in early childhood, from the perspective of item response theory (IRT). The battery was included in the 48-month assessment of the Family Life Project, a prospective longitudinal study of 1292 children oversampled from low-income and African American families. IRT models were applied to a select set of tasks to demonstrate empirically (a) a principled method for item evaluation, including the utility of item characteristic curves; (b) how to explicitly test whether the measurement properties of executive function tasks are invariant across mutually exclusive subgroups of youths; (c) how the precision of measurement of a given task can vary according to underlying child ability; and (d) the utility of using IRT-based versus percentage correct scores. Results are discussed with respect to the importance of developing psychometrically sound and scalable instruments that facilitate the measurement of interindividual differences in intraindividual change of executive function across the early childhood period.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jecp.2010.04.007

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Self-ordered searching tasks are used with preschoolers and require information, usually visual-spatial, to be maintained and updated in short-term memory.

    “Another working memory paradigm used with preschoolers is self-ordered searching tasks, which requires information, usually visual-spatial, to be maintained and updated in short-term memory.”

    From Assessing Executive Function in Preschoolers (2012) · cites this paper as M. T. Willoughby, Wirth, & Blair, 2011

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 50 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Cai, L., du Toit, H. S. C., & Thissen, D. (in press). IRTPro: Flexible, multidimensional, multiple categorical IRT modeling [computer software]. Chicago: SSI International.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Willoughby, M. T., Wirth, R. J., & Blair, C. B.
Affiliations
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • New York University (US)
Corresponding author
Willoughby, Michael T.
Venue
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-03
Volume
108
Issue
3
Pages
414-435
ISSN
0022-0965 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2083472871
Cited by
102
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 6
FWCI
7.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Child Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (P01 HD 39667, HD39667)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (P01 HD39667, P01HD039667, R01HD051502)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
Keywords
executive function, early childhood, item response theory, measurement invariance, item characteristic curves, measurement precision, psychometric properties, Family Life Project, low-income households, African American children, individual differences
MeSH terms
Attention, Black or African American, Child, Preschool, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Neuropsychological Tests, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Poverty, Prospective Studies, Psychometrics, Task Performance and Analysis, Executive Function, Stroop Test

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review