Executive Function Training for Deaf Children: Impact of a Music Intervention.

Kathryn Mason,Chloe Ruth Marshall,Gary Morgan

doi:10.1093/deafed/enab026

Abstract

Several studies have reported poor executive function (EF) development in deaf children with subsequent impacts on their social and academic attainment. This paper describes the results of a music-based EF intervention designed for deaf children and carried out in two sets of primary schools. This is the first classroom-based EF training study with deaf children, and it also incorporates a replication phase. The intervention was a within-subject crossover design, with 29 deaf children aged 7–11 years who participated in both an EF and an art class control activity, each lasting 10 hours over 5 weeks. Non-verbal EF skills were assessed at pre-test, the crossover point, and post-test. Findings indicated that the EF intervention led to an improvement in participants’ working memory and inhibitory skills in comparison with their performance on the same tasks after the control activity. The findings were not uniform for all EFs targeted nor for all cognitive ability levels in the sample. We discuss the implications of our findings for deaf children with different ability levels and for how EF interventions can be further improved.

Highlights

The fact that early experiences can lead to differential outcomes in executive function (EF) skills suggests that development is sensitive to environmental factors
During the design and implementation of EF interventions, previous research has shown that EF tasks, which fall within the child’s level of potential development are the most effective at improving EF skill
Few research studies have looked at “how much” training is required to impact on a child’s EF skills, but it is generally accepted that the longer a child is engaged in an intervention program, the more likely it is that EF improvements will be seen

Summary

Are some areas of EF more “trainable” than others?

In order to test the reliability of the intervention, it was used with different groups of children in two studies. This part of the research asked: 3. Can the intervention be replicated in different samples?. We first outline the intervention design used across both studies and the tasks used to assess changes in EF, and describe the participants and results for each study in turn. We discuss both sets of results together in the discussion section

Method

Participants

Results

C-I C-I C-I C-I C-I C-I I-C I-C I-C I-C I-C I-C I-C

Discussion