Cognitive flexibility shows no significant association with sensorimotor synchronization in any task condition¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Cognitive flexibility (DCCS) showed no significant association with synchronization across any condition. → Yunhee Kim 2026

Evidence¶

Yunhee Kim 2026¶

Yunhee Kim, Doyeon Chae, Jaehwan Jang, Kyeong Taek Oh, Byeong-Sun Park & Min-gu Kim. (2026). Does tapping in sync reflect cognitive control? Links between sensorimotor synchronization, social context, and executive function in early childhood. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-026-00443-5

q3 · i? · associational · r2

Null result across the correlation and regression analyses of EF components in 140 preschoolers; the authors interpret it as suggesting synchronization's cognitive demands are specific to temporal-motor regulation rather than flexible strategy shifting.

"Regarding cognitive flexibility, our findings revealed no significant association with sensorimotor synchronization across any of the conditions."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Executive Function — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Related Claims¶

• Slow 50 bpm bimanual tapping in the solo condition is selectively associated with inhibitory control, working memory, and overall EF, though associations do not survive FDR correction — related
• Rhythmic context dominates synchronization variability: music tapping is far less synchronized than metronome tapping, while the 50 bpm bimanual task does not differ from 150 bpm — related
• Hand asymmetries in synchronization vary by task: left-hand variability is greater in sequential unimanual tasks but slightly reversed in the 50 bpm bimanual task — related