Research on the developmental patterns of the preschool children’s executive function under cross-ethnic background

Abstract

Executive function (EF) is foundational for school readiness, mental health, and social adaptation. Although cross-national studies document cultural variation in EF, less is known about whether EF differs across ethnic groups within the same national and educational context. In China, Yi, Bai, and Naxi children may differ in home language, childrearing practices, and educational beliefs, making them informative for examining universal and context-specific patterns of EF development. This study examined Executive Function (EF) development in a sample of 190 Chinese ethnic children (Yi, Bai, Naxi; 115 boys, 75 girls) aged 4–6 years. These findings revealed that, (1) Overall EF scores were highest for Bai children, followed by Naxi children, and than Yi children. (2) For inhibition control (IC), at ages 4 and 5, Bai and Naxi children performed significantly better than Yi children, whereas no significant differences were observed among the three ethnic groups at age 6. (3) For cognitive flexibility (CF), Bai and Naxi children are significantly better than Yi children. On the size, color, and shape sub-dimensions, pass rates were highest for Bai children, followed by Naxi and then Yi children; on the quantity sub-dimension, pass rates were highest for Naxi children, followed by Bai and then Yi children. (4) For working memory (WM), at ages 4 and 6, the ranking of scores across the three ethnic groups showed that Bai children obtained the highest scores, followed by Naxi children and than Yi children; at age 5, Bai children scored significantly higher than Naxi and Yi children. These findings contribute to theories of EF development by revealing both age-related convergence and cross-ethnic variation, and they inform culturally responsive early childhood education and intervention.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 0 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.