ArticlePsychological research2026
Executive functioning in the first 24 months: A scoping review of the A-not-B task.
Article in Psychological research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent studies highlight the importance of early executive functioning (EF); notwithstanding, these studies remain limited due to methodological difficulties. The A-not-B task has been adapted to assess EF; however, variations in its administration hinder result comparability and standardization. This scoping review mapped the procedures used in studies employing the A-not-B task to assess EF in children up to 24 months. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for empirical studies published in English. From 350 references, 53 articles were included. Most studies primarily focused on assessing global EF, working memory, and inhibitory control; employed the standard two-locations task with fixed delays, used two consecutive correct trials to switch locations, and measured accuracy as the main outcome. Testing typically ended after the completion of trials/sequences. Few studies reported inclusion criteria. This review summarizes A-not-B procedures to identify research gaps and support methodological consistency in early EF assessment.
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.