Syntes: Birtwistle et al. (2025) — EF training in 4–6-year-olds went with gains on literacy and numeracy tests right after training

Källa: Birtwistle, E.; Chernikova, O.; Wünsch, M.; Niklas, F. (2025). Training of Executive Functions in Children: A meta-analysis of cognitive training interventions. SAGE Open 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241311060

Verified content

• [full text] 57 published studies (RCTs or quasi-experiments with a treated or untreated control, pre- and post-test), typically developing children aged 3–14, at least 80 minutes of training; immediate post-tests only; one outlier study excluded.
• [full text] Overall g = .23 (SE .07, 95% CI .09 to .37); far transfer (all ages) g = 0.26; literacy g = 0.29 (df = 12), numeracy g = 0.20 (df = 13).
• [full text] Ages 4–6 (29 studies): overall g = .27 (CI .08 to .45); near transfer g = 0.25 (p = .004); far transfer g = 0.34 (SE .15, p = .05, df = 11); literacy g = 0.40 (SE .09, p = .01, df = 4), numeracy g = 0.39 (SE .08, p = .003, df = 5), reasoning 0.33 (ns). Near and far transfer did not differ significantly.
• [full text] Heterogeneity high (I² = 84%); no sign of publication bias on funnel, asymmetry or p-curve. Type of control was not a significant predictor in the meta-regression.

Limits

• [assessment] Mixes randomised and quasi-experimental studies; only immediate post-tests; the age-band literacy and numeracy estimates rest on very few degrees of freedom (4 and 5), and far transfer for ages 4–6 is only marginal (p = .05); published studies only. Not a kill-condition test of C29 (randomised trials only).

Why it is in the library

Applied 2026-10-31 (nightly attacks) against C29's flat "does not raise learning-related or academic outcomes".

Added 2026-10-31 by the project. [full text] = read on the publisher's open-access page.