preprints.org > biology and life sciences > neuroscience and neurology > doi: 10.20944/preprints202401.2093.v1

Preprint Review Version 1 Preserved in Portico This version is not peer-reviewed

Version 1 : Received: 29 January 2024 / Approved: 30 January 2024 / Online: 30 January 2024 (09:15:31 CET)

Direct assessments of executive function (EF) are increasingly used in research and clinical settings, with a central assumption that they assess “universal” underlying skills. Their use is spreading globally, raising questions about the cultural appropriateness of assessments devised in Western, industrialized countries. We reviewed multidisciplinary evidence and theory to identify sets of cultural preferences that may be at odds with the implicit assumptions of EF assessments. These preferences relate to motivation and compliance; cultural expectations for interpersonal engagement; contextualized vs. academic thinking; cultural notions of speed and time; the willingness to be silly, be incorrect, or do the opposite; and subject-matter familiarity. In each case, we discuss how the cultural preference may be incompatible with the assumptions of assessments, and how future research and practice can address the issue. Many of the cultural preferences discussed differ between interdependent and independent cultures and between schooled and unschooled populations. Adapting testing protocols to these cultural preferences in different contexts will be important for expanding our scientific understanding of EF from the narrow slice of the human population that has participated in the research to date.

Assessment; Culture; Real-life measurements; Executive Functions; Naturalistic settings; Schooling

Biology and Life Sciences, Neuroscience and Neurology

* All users must log in before leaving a comment