ArticlePloS one2022
Executive function assessment: Adaptation of the Amsterdam executive function inventory using Spanish first-year university students from two knowledge areas.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- From financial scarcity to risk and time preferences: the role of executive functions.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Validity and reliability of the executive function scale in Cuban university student.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Assessing executive functioning in higher education: development and structural validation of a new self-report scale.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMany university students have difficulties in adapting to autonomous learning due to executive functioning deficits. In the Spanish university context, there is a lack of reliable validated instruments for the evaluation of executive functioning. In this sense, the aim of this research is to present the process of adaptation and validation of the Amsterdam Executive Function Inventory (AEFI) for the evaluation of executive functioning in the Spanish context.
methodsThis study integrates two sequential processes: questionnaire translation and back-translation, and evaluation of the psychometric properties (exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis were conducted), reliability, validity and multigroup analysis to identify factorial invariance. An online questionnaire was used for data collection and R package lavaan software was administered to a sample of 519 first-year university students (270 females and 249 males).
resultsThe exploratory factor analysis evidenced an interna structure of three factors with adequate internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha higher than 0.70), endorsed in the confirmatory factor analysis that indicated an adequate goodness-of-fit-indexes for the model. The composite reliability showed values between 0.74 and 0.82, and the convergent (average variance extracted values ranged from 0.50 to 0.61) and discriminant validity were adequate. A multigroup-analysis showed the invariance factorial through the difference in the RMSEA, CFI and TLI index, performed both in the model comparison according to gender and academic disciplines.
conclusionThe AEFI adapted for Spanish has practical implications for the management of university students, as it can facilitate the improvement of university policies designed to foster the development of executive functions, specifically in first-year students.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.