Abstract
There is growing evidence supporting the importance of executive functions, and specifically working memory updating (WMU), for children’s academic achievement. This study aimed to assess the specific contribution of updating to the prediction of academic performance. Two updating tasks, which included different updating components, were administered to 97 fourth-grade children. The keeping track task involves retrieval and substitution of information, while the numerical updating task also includes a transformation component. Academic attainment was assessed through standardised tests of verbal comprehension, arithmetic operations, mathematical problems and an assessment made by the teacher. The relative contribution to academic attainment, of the updating measures and measures related to intelligence, was compared. Results showed that both updating tasks are predictive measures of academic attainment, although the numerical updating task appeared to be a more consistent predictor of children’s performance. The relationship between updating and academic attainment is discussed, and possible educational implications are considered. The role of the transformation component of WMU is highlighted. This component could make a distinct and independent contribution to performance and, by extension, could be particularly relevant to the prediction of academic achievement.
Notes
1. In both WMU tasks the number of items to be recalled was manipulated. In both WMU tasks, participants performed better in the low load vs. the high load condition, which shows that the difficulty manipulation was effective: 60.18 compared with 46.57 for the keep-track task, F(1, 96) = 115.147; Mce = 78; p < .001; η2 = .545, and 56.88 compared with 42.19 for the numerical updating task, F(1, 96) = 135.676; Mce = 77.058; p < .001, η2 = .841. Means obtained for each task indicate that all of the conditions, even those considered low load, entail a considerable level of difficulty. However, the analysis of the manipulation effect of the load did not provide relevant additional information in terms of the questions discussed here, and so this factor was not included in the analyses.