Search

Fine motor skills and executive function are two examples of domain-general skills. Both are correlates of arithmetic and reading ability, and have been identified as predictors of school readiness. Little research has simultaneously assessed the influence of both these skills as predictors of academic abilities. Current evidence suggests their role as predictors lessens once children enter school. Importantly this limited research often disregards the role of well-established domain-specific predictors. In this large-scale longitudinal study (N = 569) we evaluate the role of fine motor skills, executive function, and domain-specific skills at 5-years as predictors of arithmetic and reading skills at 6-years. Fine motor skills and executive function at school entry correlate strongly with each other, with the longitudinal association between fine motor skills and performance in reading and arithmetic completely accounted for by variance shared with executive function skills. However, neither executive function nor fine motor skills account for variance in reading or arithmetic after controlling for more proximal predictors of these skills. If either fine motor or executive function skills promote learning in school, it seems their effects on reading and arithmetic development may be mediated by more proximal skills. From an applied perspective, this study casts doubt on the usefulness of motor skills as a target for intervention to support academic performance, at least after school entry. It also highlights the need to examine more closely the relations between domain-general and domain-specific skills in early development.

Emoji are vastly becoming an integral part of everyday communication, yet little is understood about the extent to which these are processed emotionally. Previous research shows that there is a processing advantage for emotionally-valenced words over neutral ones, therefore if emoji are indeed emotional, one could expect an equivalent processing advantage. In the Pilot Study, participants (N = 44) completed a lexical decision task to explore accuracy and response latency of word, face and emoji stimuli. This stimuli varied in emotional valence (positive vs. neutral). Main effects were found for stimuli type and valence on both accuracy and latency, although the interaction for accuracy was not significant. That is, there were processing advantages of positively-valenced stimuli over neutral ones, across all stimuli types. Also, faces and emoji were processed significantly more quickly than words, and latencies between face and emoji stimuli, irrespective of valence were largely equivalent. The Main Study recruited 33 participants to undertake a modified and extended version of the lexical decision task, which included three valence conditions (positive, negative and neutral) per stimuli type. Although no main effects were found for accuracy, there was a significant main effect found for stimuli but not for valence on latency. Namely, that word stimuli irrespective of valence were processed significantly more slowly than face or emoji stimuli. There was not a significant interaction between stimuli and valence, however. Therefore, overall although there was partial support for a processing advantage of emoji stimuli, this was not replicated across the studies reported here, suggesting additional work may be needed to corroborate further evidence

Participants consisted of 496 children (mean age = 6 years; 9 months) recruited from 11 schools in Brisbane, Australia. Children were assessed on the addition and subtraction subtests of the Test of Basic Arithmetic and Number Skills (TOBANS), an adapted version of the Head-Toes-Knees-Shoulders task to measure inhibition, numerosity discrimination using eight subtests varying ratio (2:3 or 5:6) and congruency, and non-verbal cognitive ability using an adapted version of Raven's Coloured Progressive Matrices. Information on children's demographics (gender, English as an additional language, and learning difficulty status) is also provided. All assessments were administered during the second year of formal schooling (i.e. Grade 1). Findings regarding the impact of inhibition on the relation between numerosity discrimination and arithmetic are reported elsewhere [1].

Weak or inconsistent hand preference may be a risk factor for developmental language delay. This study will test the extent to which variations in language skills are associated with the strength of hand preference. Data are drawn from a large sample (n = 569) of 6-to 7-year-old children unselected for ability, assessed at two time points, 6 months apart. Hand preference is assessed using the Quantitative Hand Preference task (QHP) and five uni-manual motor tasks. Language skills (expressive and receptive vocabulary, receptive grammar, and morphological awareness) are assessed with standardized measures. If weak cerebral lateralisation (as assessed by the QHP task) is a risk factor for language difficulties, it should be possible to detect such effects in the large representative sample of children examined here.

Background: Weak or inconsistent hand preference has been postulated to be a risk factor for developmental language delay. Following on from our Registered Stage 1 report this study assessed the extent to which variations in language skills are associated with the strength of hand preference. Methods: Data are drawn from a large sample (N = 569) of 6-to 7-year-old children unselected for ability, assessed at two time points, 6 months apart. Hand preference was assessed using the Quantitative Hand Preference (QHP) task and five uni-manual motor tasks. Language skills (expressive and receptive vocabulary, receptive grammar, and morphological awareness) were assessed with standardized measures. Results: We found QHP scores did not distinguish children with weaker language skills from those with stronger language skills and the correlation between QHP scores and language ability was negligible in this study. Hand preference on the QHP task was significantly stronger among right-handed than left-handed children and left-handed children were typically inconsistent in the hand used across different tasks. Conclusions: The findings presented here fail to provide any support for the theory that weak cerebral lateralisation (as assessed here by the QHP task) places children at risk of language difficulties.