Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35640882›Full record

ArticleAustralian occupational therapy journal2022

Executive functions and household chores: Does engagement in chores predict children's cognition?

Deanna L Tepper, Tiffani J Howell, Pauleen C Bennett

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Australian occupational therapy journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Deanna L TepperLa Trobe University, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7491-1160
Tiffani J HowellLa Trobe University, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4932-5792
Pauleen C BennettLa Trobe University, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5864-4464

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe benefits of completing household chores appear to transfer beyond managing day-to-day living. It is possible that chore engagement may improve executive functions, as engagement in chores require individuals to plan, self-regulate, switch between tasks, and remember instructions. To date, little research has been conducted on household chores and executive functions in children, for whom these skills are still developing.

methodsParents and guardians (N = 207) of children aged 5-13 years (M = 9.38, SD = 2.15) were asked to complete parent-report questionnaires on their child's engagement in household chores and their child's executive functioning.

resultsResults of the regression model indicated that engagement in self-care chores (e.g., making self a meal) and family-care chores (e.g., making someone else a meal) significantly predicted working memory and inhibition, after controlling for the influence of age, gender, and presence or absence of a disability. For families with a pet, there was no significant relationship between engagement in pet-care chores and executive function skills.

conclusionWe strongly recommend that further research explore the relationship between chores and executive functions. It is possible that parents may be able to facilitate their child's executive function development through encouraging participation in chores, whereas chore-based interventions (e.g., cooking programmes) may also be used to target deficits in ability.

Indexed as

Executive FunctionOccupational TherapyActivities of Daily LivingChildCognitionHumansParentsactivities of daily livingchild behaviourchild developmentexecutive functionspet-owner relationships

Identifiers

PMID35640882
PMCPMC9796572

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.