Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40922094›Full record

ArticleDevelopmental science2025

Neural Oscillatory Markers of Voluntary Task Switching: Proactive Engagement of Self-Directed Control in Children and Adults.

Nicolas Chevalier, Aurélien Frick

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Developmental science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Nicolas ChevalierDepartment of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7899-8822
Aurélien FrickDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cognitive control shows two main developmental trends: greater self-directedness (i.e., children need less external scaffolding) and greater proactiveness (i.e., children increasingly anticipate and prepare for upcoming cognitive demands). The present study examined potential links between these major developmental transitions. Specifically, it used EEG oscillations to investigate the extent to which children, like adults, engage self-directed control in a proactive fashion, and whether age-related changes reflect progress in task selection, motor preparation, or both. Five-6-year-olds, 9-10-year-olds, and adults performed a voluntary task-switching paradigm in which visual support for past actions was manipulated. Both children and adults showed greater frontolateral delta/theta power and lower central mu power on switch than repeat trials, but visual support differentially affected these oscillatory markers across age groups. Children already engage self-directed control proactively from 5 to 6 years of age in the voluntary task-switching paradigm, albeit differently than adults, suggesting close links between self-directed and proactive control developments. SUMMARY: Neural oscillatory markers of proactive control are examined in 5-6-year-olds, 9-10-year-olds, and adults in the voluntary task-switching paradigm. Both children and adults engaged in proactive task selection and motor preparation, as evidenced by frontolateral delta/theta power and mu suppression, respectively. Children already engage self-directed control proactively from 5-6 years of age in the voluntary task-switching paradigm, albeit differently than adults.

Indexed as

Child DevelopmentCognitionPsychomotor PerformanceAdultAge FactorsChildChild, PreschoolElectroencephalographyFemaleHumansMaleYoung Adultcognitive controlEEGexecutive functionproactive controlself‐directed control

Identifiers

PMID40922094
PMCPMC12417625

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.