Abstract
This study investigated the age-related differences in the random number generation (RNG) of children aged 7 to 15 years old (n=106) divided into three groups (7-9, 10-12 and 13-15 years of age) as it was compared to computer-generated pseudorandom sequences. The results showed that there was an age effect on four out of seven indices of randomization that are known to tap the Inhibition ability and the Updating ability (i.e., active manipulation of relevant information in working memory). The participants’ (children’s and adolescents’; n=106) responses were significantly different from pseudorandom sequences (n=106) produced by the RgCalc program and no gender differences were observed. The RNG task indices that reflect inhibition ability did not correlate with the participants’ performance on the Stroop color-word task. The development of executive functions in school-aged children and adolescents is discussed.
Highlights
1.1 Theoretical BackgroundRegarding education, executive functions (EF) are used daily especially in various cognitive functions, such as working memory, attention, cognitive flexibility, problem solving, inhibitory control, verbal fluency, and speed of processing (Chan, Shum, Toulopoulou, & Chen, 2008; Faria, Alves, & Charchat-Fichman, 2015; Meixner, Warner, Lensing, Schiefele, & Elsner, 2019)
This study investigated the age-related differences in the random number generation (RNG) of children aged 7 to 15 years old (n=106) divided into three groups (7-9, 10-12 and 13-15 years of age) as it was compared to computer-generated pseudorandom sequences
R score was significantly lower for the age group of 10 to 12 years old compared to the youngest group, whereas Mean Repetition Gap (Mean RG), Adjacency combined score (A comb) and Random Number Generation (RNG) were significantly better in the oldest group in comparison to the youngest group
Summary
Executive functions (EF) are used daily especially in various cognitive functions, such as working memory, attention, cognitive flexibility, problem solving, inhibitory control, verbal fluency, and speed of processing (Chan, Shum, Toulopoulou, & Chen, 2008; Faria, Alves, & Charchat-Fichman, 2015; Meixner, Warner, Lensing, Schiefele, & Elsner, 2019). An RNG task employs inhibitory control (Inhibition) and the ability to update verbal production (i.e., Updating), while keeping in working memory previous answers; these abilities tap different sets of randomness indices (Miyake et al, 2000). Despite RNG’s easy administration and usefulness (Brugger, 1997; Geisseler et al, 2016) a recent scoping review demonstrates that this task is not frequently used in order to investigate EF in adolescent populations (Nyongesa et al, 2019). Children with low working memory span present difficulties in sustained attention, problem-solving, and self-monitoring (Alloway, Gathercole, Kirkwood, & Elliott, 2009)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
