Volume 10 -
MEJDS (2020) 10: 156 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Zamani L, Molanorouzi K, Ghasemi A. The Effect of Self-Regulation on Children’s Fine Motor Development and Executive Function. MEJDS 2020; 10 :156-156
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-1481-en.html
URL: http://jdisabilstud.org/article-1-1481-en.html
1- Department of Physical Education, College of Humanities, Science and Research, Branch Islamic Azad University
2- Science and Research Branch Islamic Azad University
2- Science and Research Branch Islamic Azad University
Abstract: (2724 Views)
Background & Objectives: Motor development in the form of fine and gross motor skills, besides cognitive development significantly affects executive functioning skills, including response inhibition, attention, and motor performance in the future of children. Developmental interventions could be important in developing these motor and cognitive skills. There are various forms of related practice interventions. One of these forms is self–regulation. Therefore, the present research explored the effect of self–regulation conditions on children’s fine skills in motor development and executive functioning.
Methods: This was a quasi–experimental study with a pretest–posttest and a control group design. The study subjects consisted of 60 girls aged 7, 9, and 11 years in Isfahan City, Iran, in 2018 who were selected by purposive sampling method. Participants in each age group were randomly divided into two 10–subject self–regulating and control groups. In the pretest phase, children participated in the test of Fine Motor Skills of the Bruininks–Oseretsky (Vaez Mousavi and Shojaee, 2005) and the Flanker Executive Functioning Test (Davidson et al., 2006). Then, the experimental group received an interventional program for 8 weeks (two 60–min sessions per week) in a self–regulation setting. Besides, in a self–regulating situation, a child was placed in a control situation; they participated in developmental interventions in consonance with the child's self–regulation situation and similar to their choices. At the end of the interventions and one month later, posttest and follow–up surveys were performed regarding the motor and cognitive development variables. Statistical analysis was performed using the repeated–measures Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) at a significance level of 0.05 in SPSS. The Bruininks–Oseretsky test package is a motion scale in a standardized reference norm. The retest reliability coefficient of the Bruininks–Oseretsky test was reported as 78% and 86% for the long and short forms, respectively. In this research, the fine skills of the subtest in the short form were used in the pretest, posttest, and follow–up stages. The fine executive functioning test was developed by Davidson et al., and its reliability was reported as 0.72. This test is used to evaluate the components of active memory and inhibition, and recording the results in this test is automatically conducted by a computer.
Results: The present study results related to fine motor skills indicated the self–regulation values in all age groups were significant, as follows: 7 years (F=5.24, p=0.035); 9 years (F=7.11, p=0.016), and 11 years (F=9.70, p=0.006). Comparing the mean scores revealed that the growth of fine motor skills of the intervention group was significantly higher than that of the yoked group in all three age groups. Concerning inhibitory control at the age of 9 years, the main effect of the group was significant (F=4.58, p=0.047). However, in the age groups of 7 and 11 years, the main effect of the group was not significant (p˃0.620, p >0.110, respectively).
Conclusion: Providing self–regulation strategies in the training conditions improved performance in learning and cognitive development among the investigated girls in the age range of 7, 9, and 11 years. According to the current research results, it is suggested this strategy be used to improve the performance of children in learning and development.
Methods: This was a quasi–experimental study with a pretest–posttest and a control group design. The study subjects consisted of 60 girls aged 7, 9, and 11 years in Isfahan City, Iran, in 2018 who were selected by purposive sampling method. Participants in each age group were randomly divided into two 10–subject self–regulating and control groups. In the pretest phase, children participated in the test of Fine Motor Skills of the Bruininks–Oseretsky (Vaez Mousavi and Shojaee, 2005) and the Flanker Executive Functioning Test (Davidson et al., 2006). Then, the experimental group received an interventional program for 8 weeks (two 60–min sessions per week) in a self–regulation setting. Besides, in a self–regulating situation, a child was placed in a control situation; they participated in developmental interventions in consonance with the child's self–regulation situation and similar to their choices. At the end of the interventions and one month later, posttest and follow–up surveys were performed regarding the motor and cognitive development variables. Statistical analysis was performed using the repeated–measures Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) at a significance level of 0.05 in SPSS. The Bruininks–Oseretsky test package is a motion scale in a standardized reference norm. The retest reliability coefficient of the Bruininks–Oseretsky test was reported as 78% and 86% for the long and short forms, respectively. In this research, the fine skills of the subtest in the short form were used in the pretest, posttest, and follow–up stages. The fine executive functioning test was developed by Davidson et al., and its reliability was reported as 0.72. This test is used to evaluate the components of active memory and inhibition, and recording the results in this test is automatically conducted by a computer.
Results: The present study results related to fine motor skills indicated the self–regulation values in all age groups were significant, as follows: 7 years (F=5.24, p=0.035); 9 years (F=7.11, p=0.016), and 11 years (F=9.70, p=0.006). Comparing the mean scores revealed that the growth of fine motor skills of the intervention group was significantly higher than that of the yoked group in all three age groups. Concerning inhibitory control at the age of 9 years, the main effect of the group was significant (F=4.58, p=0.047). However, in the age groups of 7 and 11 years, the main effect of the group was not significant (p˃0.620, p >0.110, respectively).
Conclusion: Providing self–regulation strategies in the training conditions improved performance in learning and cognitive development among the investigated girls in the age range of 7, 9, and 11 years. According to the current research results, it is suggested this strategy be used to improve the performance of children in learning and development.
Keywords: Self–regulation, Executive functioning, Inhibitory control, Development, Fine motor development, Bruininks–Oseretsky, Flanker test.
Type of Study: Original Research Article |
Subject:
Psychology
References
1. Piaget J. The Origin of Intelligence in the Child. Routledge and Kegan Paul; 1953.
2. Adolph KE. Learning to Learn in the Development of Action. In: Rieser JJ, Lockman JJ, Nelson CA. Action As An Organizer of Learning and Development: Volume 33 in the Minnesota Symposium on Child Psychology Series. Psychology Press; 2005. pp: 91–122.
3. Diamond A. Close interrelation of motor development and cognitive development and of the cerebellum and prefrontal cortex. Child Dev. 2000;71(1):44–56. [DOI]
4. Viholainen H, Ahonen T, Lyytinen P, Cantell M, Tolvanen A, Lyytinen H. Early motor development and later language and reading skills in children at risk of familial dyslexia. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2006;48(5):367–73. [DOI]
5. Ferrari M, Pinard A, Reid L, Bouffard-Bouchard T. The relationship between expertise and self-regulation in movement performance: Some theoretical issues. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 1991;72(1):139–50. [DOI]
6. Chiviacowsky S, Wulf G, de Medeiros FL, Kaefer A, Tani G. Learning benefits of self-controlled knowledge of results in 10-year-old children. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2008;79(3):405–10. [DOI]
7. Zelazo PD, Müller U, Frye D, Marcovitch S, Argitis G, Boseovski J, et al. The development of executive function in early childhood. Monogr Soc Res Child Dev. 2003;68(3):vii–137. [DOI]
8. Avila C, Parcet MA. Personality and inhibitory deficits in the stop-signal task: the mediating role of Gray’s anxiety and impulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences. 2001;31(6):975–86. [DOI]
9. Dawson P, Guare R. Executive Skills in Children and Adolescents: A Practical Guide to Assessment and Intervention. 3rd ed. New York: Guilford Press; 2018.
10. Clarson AG. Kindergarten fine motor skills and executive function: Two non-academic predictors of academic achievement [Ph.D dissertion]. [Fairfax, USA]: George Mason University; 2013.
11. Hajloo N, Rezaie Sharif A. Psychometric properties of Colorado Learning Difficulties Questionnaire (CLDQ). Journal of Learning Disabilities. 2011;1(1):24–43. [Persian] [Article]
12. Westendorp M, Houwen S, Hartman E, Mombarg R, Smith J, Visscher C. Effect of a ball skill intervention on children’s ball skills and cognitive functions. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2014;46(2):414–22. [DOI]
13. Salman A, Amini HA, Zarian E. The effect of gymnastics training on executive functions children with developmental coordination disorder. Journal of Applied Psycology Research. 2014;5(2):47–64. [Persian] [DOI]
14. Hashemi A, Sheikh M, Hemayat-Talab R. The effect of regular exercise on motor function in children with developmental coordination disorder. International Journal of Sport Studies. 2016;15(58):261–75.
15. Tsai C-L, Wang C-H, Tseng Y-T. Effects of exercise intervention on event-related potential and task performance indices of attention networks in children with developmental coordination disorder. Brain Cogn. 2012;79(1):12–22. [DOI]
16. Ball MF. Developmental coordination disorder hints and tips for the activities of daily living. London: Jessica Kingsley; 2002.
17. Saheban F, Amiri S, Kajbaf MB, Abedi A. The efficacy of short-term executive functions training on the reduction of symptoms of attention deficit and hyperactivity of elementary boy students in Esfahan metropolitan area. Advances in Cognitive Science. 2010;12(1):52–8. [Persian] [Article]
18. Vaez Mousavi S, Shojaii M. Coparison and describtion of physical characteristics of secondry school students in Tehran during 82-83. 2005;3(5):133–55. [Persian]
19. Davidson MC, Amso D, Anderson LC, Diamond A. Development of cognitive control and executive functions from 4 to 13 years: Evidence from manipulations of memory, inhibition, and task switching. Neuropsychologia. 2006;44(11):2037–78. [DOI]
20. Janelle CM, Kim J, Singer RN. Subject-controlled performance feedback and learning of a closed motor skill. Percept Mot Skills. 1995;81(2):627–34. [DOI]
21. Grand KF, Bruzi AT, Dyke FB, Godwin MM, Leiker AM, Thompson AG, et al. Why self-controlled feedback enhances motor learning: Answers from electroencephalography and indices of motivation. Human Movement Science. 2015;43:23–32. [DOI]
22. Stöckel T, Hughes CML. The relation between measures of cognitive and motor functioning in 5- to 6-year-old children. Psychol Res. 2016;80(4):543–54. [DOI]
23. Livesey D, Keen J, Rouse J, White F. The relationship between measures of executive function, motor performance and externalising behaviour in 5- and 6-year-old children. Hum Mov Sci. 2006;25(1):50–64. [DOI]
24. Roebers CM, Kauer M. Motor and cognitive control in a normative sample of 7-year-olds. Dev Sci. 2009;12(1):175–81. [DOI]
25. Diamond A. Executive Functions. Annu Rev Psychol. 2013;64(1):135–68. [DOI]
26. Lakes KD, Hoyt WT. Promoting self-regulation through school-based martial arts training. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. 2004 ;25(3):283-302.
27. Amini H, Jaberi Mogadam AA. The effect of gymnastics training on neuropsychological functioning of children with developmental coordination disorder. Journal of Motor Learning and Movement. 2015;7(2):217–38. [Persian] [DOI]
28. Fürst AJ, Hitch GJ. Separate roles for executive and phonological components of working memory in mental arithmetic. Mem Cognit. 2000;28(5):774–82. [DOI]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
