Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Mar;61(2):159-178.
doi: 10.1002/dev.21794. Epub 2018 Oct 30.

The relationship between cognitive enrichment and cognitive control: A systematic investigation of environmental influences on development through socioeconomic status

Dima Amso  1 , Carmel Salhi  2 , David Badre  1
Affiliations

The relationship between cognitive enrichment and cognitive control: A systematic investigation of environmental influences on development through socioeconomic status

Dima Amso et al. Dev Psychobiol. 2019 Mar.

Abstract

We measured the impact of socioeconomic status (SES) on cognitive processes. We examined cognitive control, specifically working memory (WM), in a sample of N = 141 7- to 17-year-olds using rule-guided behavior tasks. Our hypothesis is based on computational modeling data that suggest that the development of flexible cognitive control requires variable experiences in which to implement rule-guided action. We found that not all experiences that correlated with SES in our sample impacted task performance, and not all experiential variables that impacted performance were associated with SES. Of the experiential variables associated with task performance, only cognitive enrichment opportunities worked indirectly through SES to affect WM as tested with rule-guided behavior tasks. We discuss the data in the context of necessary precision in SES research.

Keywords: cognitive control; cognitive enrichment; socioeconomic status; working memory.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

CONFLIC T OF INTEREST

We have no conflicts to disclose.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Illustrates three tasks that parametrically manipulate working memory (WM) updating (through rule-order) and WM maintenance (through the number of alternatives maintained in WM for action). Across all tasks, performance costs on the 1 versus 2 blocks measure the cost of updating higher order rules into working memory for action as well as increasing WM maintenance, whereas performance on the 2 versus 4 blocks isolates the cost of WM maintenance. The Response task R1 block is a zero-order rule. A single response is correct for any stimulus. Correct response on R2 and R4 blocks requires updating of first-order rules into WM, where the color of the box indicates the correct response. The R4 block maintains the same first-order rule structure as R2, but adds additional alternatives for WM maintenance. The Feature and Dimension tasks follow the same logic. The Feature task F1 is a first-order rule block, while F2 and F4 are second-order blocks. Participants are instructed to determine whether the arrow is pointing in the right direction given the box color. Among the second-order F2 and F4 blocks, only the number of competing alternatives for WM maintenance (from 2 to 4) is increased. The Dimension Task D1 block is a second-order block, whereas D2 and D4 are third-order rule blocks. Participants are instructed to use the box color to then select a dimension (shape, orientation) to then match to an arrow direction. D2 and D4 are both third-order rule blocks, but D4 increases only the number of competing alternatives maintained in WM for action
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Illustrates path model. We used separate models for each measure of socioeconomic status (household income, income-to-needs ratio, parents’ occupational level, and parents’ years of education) as well as for the outcomes of working memory (WM) tasks. Mediators and WM task data were selected based on hypothesized effects and significance in previous models
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Response, Feature, and Dimension task performance for (a) RT (ms) and (b) accuracy (percent correct responses)
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Simple correlations to illustrate the Feature task working memory (WM) updating performance for (a) accuracy and (b) reaction time costs (Block 2 − Block 1) as a function of Cognitive Enrichment subscale scores
FIGURE 5
FIGURE 5
Simple correlations to illustrate the Feature task accuracy for working memory (WM) maintenance (Block 4 − Block 2) as a function of Cognitive Enrichment subscale scores
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Ackerman PL, Beier ME, & Boyle MO (2005). Working memory and intelligence: The same or different constructs? Psychological Bulletin, 131(1), 30–60. 10.1037/0033-2909.131.1.30 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Allison PD (2012). Handling missing data by maximum likelihood. Paper presented at the SAS Global Forum, Orlando, FL. Retrieved from http://www.statisticalhorizons.com/wp-content/uploads/MissingDataByML.pdf
    1. Amso D, Haas S, McShane L, & Badre D (2014). Working memory updating and the development of rule-guided behavior. Cognition, 133(1), 201–210. 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.06.012 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Amso D, & Lynn A (2017). Distinctive mechanisms of adversity and socioeconomic inequality in child development: A review and recommendations for evidence-based policy. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 4(2), 139–146. 10.1177/2372732217721933 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ansary NS, McMahon TJ, & Luthar SS (2017). Trajectories of emotional–behavioral difficulty and academic competence: A 6-year, person-centered, prospective study of affluent suburban adolescents. Development and Psychopathology, 29(1), 215–234. 10.1017/S0954579416000110 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types