Inhibitory control task does not significantly moderate the correlation overall, though the Random generation task shows a stronger association than Go/No-go and other tasks¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesis r? · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The omnibus moderating effect of inhibitory control task was not significant. → Zhu 2025 q3 i3 In pairwise comparisons, inhibitory control measured by the Random generation task (r = 0.39) was more strongly associated with mathematical ability than the Go/No-go task (r = 0.17) and other tasks (r = 0.16). → Zhu 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Zhu 2025¶

Zhu, X., Tang, Y., Lu, J., Song, M., Yang, C., & Zhao, X. (2025). Inhibitory Control and Mathematical Ability in Elementary School Children: A Preregistered Meta-Analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 37(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09976-w

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r?

Omnibus moderator test across seven coded task categories in the three-level meta-analysis was non-significant. Inhibitory control measured by different tasks was positively related with all six mathematical ability domains (rs = 0.16–0.39, ps ≤ 0.018).

"We found no significant moderating effect of inhibitory control task (see Table 1), F(6, 232) = 0.76, p = 0.601."

Zhu 2025 (2)¶

Zhu, X., Tang, Y., Lu, J., Song, M., Yang, C., & Zhao, X. (2025). Inhibitory Control and Mathematical Ability in Elementary School Children: A Preregistered Meta-Analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 37(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09976-w

q3 · i3 · quant-synthesis · r?

Pairwise subgroup comparisons (online SM Appendix D Table S2) showed the Random generation task correlate (r = 0.39) exceeded both the Go/No-go task (t = 1.97, p = 0.050) and other tasks (t = 2.06, p = 0.041).

"inhibitory control measured by the Random generation task (r = 0.39, 95% CI [0.18, 0.56], p < 0.001) was more strongly associated with mathematical ability than that measured by the Go/No-go task (r = 0.17, 95% CI [0.08, 0.25], p < 0.001; t = 1.97, p = 0.050) and other tasks (r = 0.16, 95% CI [0.08, 0.24], p < 0.001; t = 2.06, p = 0.041)."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Executive Function — moderator: an instructional effect differs with it

Related Claims¶

• Inhibitory control is moderately positively correlated with mathematical ability in elementary school children (r = 0.19) — related
• The inhibitory control–mathematical ability correlation does not differ across domains of mathematical ability — related
• The reward effect on inhibitory control is significant across all six IC task types, but task type significantly moderates the effect, with the largest effect in Stroop tasks — related