Embedded cognitive flexibility practice showed no overall advantage over phonics alone on growth in decoding, encoding, or cognitive flexibility¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? No mean treatment differences between Flex and Plain were observed on early literacy or cognitive flexibility growth, and no significant treatment interactions were apparent. → Vadasy 2023

Evidence¶

Vadasy 2023¶

Vadasy, P. F., & Sanders, E. A. (2023). Cognitive flexibility + phonics intervention effects on reading gains. Reading Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702711.2023.2166636

q3 · i? · causal · r2

In the randomized winter-kindergarten cohort (Flex n = 29, Plain n = 28), multilevel gain models controlling for EB status, pretest, and attendance found "No mean treatment differences were observed" on any outcome. No effect sizes were printed for these contrasts, so impact is not coded.

"No mean treatment differences were observed, nor were any significant treatment interactions apparent (coefficient test ps > .10). In other words, there was no evidence that added practice in cognitive flexibility skills benefitted students’ growth in early literacy or cognitive flexibility beyond the basic phonics intervention."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Executive Function — outcome: instruction changes it
• Decoding — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• False-belief training improves preschoolers' theory of mind scores but the review reports it has no effect on language skills — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• CCT shows no significant effects on executive functions or attention in healthy older adults — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• Cognitive flexibility training added to phonemic awareness training produces significantly greater growth in cognitive flexibility than phonemic awareness training alone in kindergarten and first-grade students — reports the opposite
• Only the discussion of the Flex vs. Plain phonics trial reports that, for students with full week-6 attendance, Flex showed greater gains than Plain on taught-letter alphabetics, decoding, and word reading; its results report no treatment differences or interactions — related
• Higher pretest cognitive flexibility predicted greater decoding gains and compensated for lower pretest alphabet knowledge — related
• Pretest, attendance, and EB status showed distinct covariate effects on specific literacy outcomes — related
• Treatment effects were not moderated by emergent bilingual status, pretest levels, or tutoring attendance — related
• Systematic Phonics Improves Word Reading — related
• Kindergarteners using Bridge to Reading showed greater growth in phonological awareness and phonics/word recognition (ES +0.22 each) — related
• Neither treatment nor typical-practice students with severe reading difficulties demonstrated significant standard-score growth over the 13-week study
• School meditation studies show significant improvements on several cognitive functioning measures, though effects vary by measure and study — related
• Training effects on flexibility and word problem solving do not differ between students with low and high language skills — related
• The multi-component intervention produced statistically significant advantages over business-as-usual on one decoding measure (ES = 0.58) and one fluency measure (ES = 0.46), but not on reading comprehension — related