The relationship between family factors and children’s executive function: A series of meta-analyses

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1042.2026.1170

Abstract

Abstract:

Based on the family investment model and the family stress model, this study conducted a three-level meta-analysis to investigate the associations of family cognitive stimulation, parenting style, and parental psychological distress with children’s executive function. In addition, it compared the relative strength of these associations across family factors.Previous studies have typically examined the effects of a single category of family factors on children’s executive function from the perspective of either the family investment model or the family stress model. However, few studies have compared the strength of associations between different family factors and children’s executive function within a unified analytical framework. Consequently, it remains unclear which type of family factor is more closely associated with children’s executive function. To address this issue, the present study synthesized relevant empirical evidence to provide clearer support for understanding the relative roles of different family factors in the development of children’s executive function.

A total of 154 studies comprising 612 effect sizes were included in the meta-analysis. The results indicated that family cognitive stimulation and positive parenting style were both significantly and positively associated with children’s executive function, whereas negative parenting style and parental psychological distress were both significantly and negatively associated with children’s executive function. Further comparisons showed that family cognitive stimulation (r= 0.146) and parenting style (positive parenting: r = 0.169; negative parenting: r = -0.128) were more closely associated with children’s executive function than parental psychological distress (r = −0.102). These findings suggest that, relative to parental psychological distress, family cognitive stimulation and parenting style may play a more direct or more prominent role in the development of children’s executive function.

With respect to moderation effects, the measurement method of family cognitive stimulation significantly influenced the magnitude of its association with children’s executive function. Specifically, compared with questionnaire-based and video-based assessments, studies using home visits to assess family cognitive stimulation yielded larger effect sizes. This finding suggests that different measurement approaches may capture different aspects of the family environment, and that home-visit assessments may better reflect the actual level of cognitive stimulation available in the family context. In addition, the measurement method of children’s executive function also significantly moderated the observed associations. When executive function was assessed using indirect measures, the effect sizes linking parental psychological distress, positive parenting style, and negative parenting style to children’s executive function were all significantly larger than those obtained when executive function was assessed using direct measures. This result indicates that the strength of associations between family factors and children’s executive function may vary depending on the assessment approach adopted for executive function, and that such methodological differences should be taken into consideration when interpreting related findings.

This study also examined the associations of different family factors with cool and hot executive function. The results showed that family cognitive stimulation, parental psychological distress, and parenting style were each significantly associated with both cool executive function and hot executive function. However, executive function type did not significantly moderate the associations between these family factors and children’s executive function. In other words, the patterns of association between family factors and children’s executive function were relatively consistent across cool and hot executive function. At the same time, variables such as age did not show significant moderating effects on the associations between family factors and children’s executive function, suggesting that these associations were generally stable across age groups.

The significance of this study is reflected in two main aspects. First, by simultaneously examining and comparing the associations of family cognitive stimulation, parenting style, and parental psychological distress with children’s executive function within the same meta-analytic framework, this study provides evidence for a more comprehensive understanding of the relative roles of different family factors in the development of children’s executive function, and also offers empirical support for integrating the family investment model and the family stress model. Second, the findings have implications for family-based interventions targeting children’s executive function. Comparing the relative strength of associations between different family factors and children’s executive function may help identify which family factors warrant greater attention in intervention practice, thereby providing a basis for promoting the development of children’s executive function.

Key words: cognitive stimulation, parental psychological distress, parenting style, executive function, three level meta-analysis

CLC Number:

B845

XU Jie, HUANG Yinghang, GAI Xiaosong. The relationship between family factors and children’s executive function: A series of meta-analyses[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2026, 34(7): 1170-1188.

Figures/Tables 14

References 64

[1]	孟现鑫, 颜晨, 俞德霖, 高树玲, 傅小兰. (2024). 童年创伤与网络成瘾关系的三水平元分析. 心理科学进展, 32(7), 1087-1103. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2024.01087
[2]	尹柯. (2023). 执行功能对一年级儿童学业成就和社会性发展的影响 [硕士学位论文]. 东北师范大学.
[3]	Anderson, P. (2002). Assessment and development of executive function (EF) during childhood. Child Neuropsychology, 8(2), 71-82. doi: 10.1076/chin.8.2.71.8724 pmid: 12638061
[4]	Assink, M., & Wibbelink, C. J. M. (2016). Fitting three-level meta-analytic models in R: A step-by-step tutorial. The Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 12(3), 154-174. doi: 10.20982/tqmp.12.3.p154 URL
[5]	Best, J. R., & Miller, P. H. (2010). A developmental perspective on executive function. Child Development, 81(6), 1641-1660. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01499.x doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01499.x URL pmid: 21077853
[6]	Blair, C., Cybele Raver, C., & Berry, D. J. (2014). Two approaches to estimating the effect of parenting on the development of executive function in early childhood. Developmental Psychology, 50(2), 554-565. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033647 doi: 10.1037/a0033647 URL pmid: 23834294
[7]	Bradley, R. H., Caldwell, B. M., & Corwyn, R. F. (2003). The child care home inventories: Assessing the quality of family child care homes. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 18(3), 294-309. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0885-2006(03)00041-3 doi: 10.1016/S0885-2006(03)00041-3 URL
[8]	Bradley, R. H., & Corwyn, R. F. (2002). Socioeconomic status and child development. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 371-399. pmid: 11752490
[9]	Bradley, R. H., Corwyn, R. F., McAdoo, H. P., & Coll, C. G. (2001). The home environments of children in the United States part I: Variations by age, ethnicity, and poverty Status. Child Development, 72(6), 1844-1867. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.t01-1-00382 doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.t01-1-00382 URL pmid: 11768149
[10]	Card, N. A. (2012). Applied meta-analysis for social science research. The Guilford Press.
[11]	Cheung, M. W. -L. (2014). Modeling dependent effect sizes with three-level meta-analyses: A structural equation modeling approach. Psychological Methods, 19(2), 211-229. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032968 doi: 10.1037/a0032968 URL
[12]	Chew, A. T. M., Bonthrone, A. F., Alford, A., Kelly, C., Pushparajah, K., Egloff, A., … Counsell, S. J. (2024). Executive function in preschool children with congenital heart disease and controls: The role of a cognitively stimulating home environment. The Journal of Pediatrics, 267, 113897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2023.113897 doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2023.113897 URL
[13]	Cohen, J. (1992). Statistical power analysis. Current directions in psychological science, 1(3), 98-101. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.ep10768783 URL
[14]	Conger, R. D., & Donnellan, M. B. (2007). An interactionist perspective on the socioeconomic context of human development. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 175-199. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085551 URL pmid: 16903807
[15]	Conger, R. D., Conger, K. J., & Martin, M. J. (2010). Socioeconomic status, family processes, and individual development. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72(3), 685-704. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00725.x URL pmid: 20676350
[16]	Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (2019). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis. Russell Sage Foundation. https://doi.org/10.7758/9781610448864
[17]	Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135-168. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143750 pmid: 23020641
[18]	Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997). Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ, 315(7109), 629-634. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 doi: 10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 URL pmid: 9310563
[19]	Enkavi, A. Z., Eisenberg, I. W., Bissett, P. G., Mazza, G. L., MacKinnon, D. P., Marsch, L. A., & Poldrack, R. A. (2019). Large-scale analysis of test-retest reliabilities of self- regulation measures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 116(12), 5472-5477. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1818430116
[20]	Franco, A., Malhotra, N., & Simonovits, G. (2014). Publication bias in the social sciences:Unlocking the file drawer. Science, 345(6203), 1502-1505. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1255484
[21]	Friedman, N. P., & Miyake, A. (2017). Unity and diversity of executive functions: Individual differences as a window on cognitive structure. Cortex, 86, 186-204. doi: S0010-9452(16)30107-1 pmid: 27251123
[22]	Gao, S., Yu, D., Assink, M., Chan, K. L., Zhang, L., & Meng, X. (2024). The association between child maltreatment and pathological narcissism: A three-level meta-analytic review. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 25(1), 275-290. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380221147559
[23]	Garcia, E. B., Sulik, M. J., & Obradović, J. (2019). Teachers’ perceptions of students’ executive functions: Disparities by gender, ethnicity, and ell status. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(5), 918-931. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000308 doi: 10.1037/edu0000308 URL
[24]	Gardner, F. (2000). Methodological issues in the direct observation of parent-child interaction: Do observational findings reflect the natural behavior of participants? Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 3(3), 185-198. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1009503409699 doi: 10.1023/A:1009503409699 URL
[25]	Gioia, G. A., Isquith, P. K., Guy, S. C., & Kenworthy, L. (2015). Brief2: Behavior rating inventory of executive function (2nd ed.). Psychological Assessment Resources.
[26]	Hanlin, P., & Zhou, Q. (2024). A unified framework of parental socialization of executive function development. Developmental Review, 73, 101149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2024.101149 doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2024.101149 URL
[27]	Hendry, A., Jones, E. J. H., & Charman, T. (2016). Executive function in the first three years of life: Precursors, predictors and patterns. Developmental Review, 42, 1-33. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.005 URL
[28]	Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003). Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. British Medical Journal, 327(7414), 557-560. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557
[29]	Hughes, C., & Ensor, R. (2009). How do families help or hinder the emergence of early executive function?. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 123, 35-50.
[30]	Koşkulu-Sancar, S., van de Weijer-Bergsma, E., Mulder, H., & Blom, E. (2023). Examining the role of parents and teachers in executive function development in early and middle childhood: A systematic review. Developmental Review, 67, 101063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2022.101063 doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2022.101063 URL
[31]	Lee, D., Boulton, K. A., Sun, C., Phillips, N. L., Munro, M., Kumfor, F., Demetriou, E. A., & Guastella, A. J. (2025). Attention and executive delays in early childhood: A meta-analysis of neurodevelopmental conditions. Molecular Psychiatry, 30(5), 1906-1914. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-024-02802-3 doi: 10.1038/s41380-024-02802-3 URL
[32]	Lengua, L. J., Honorado, E., & Bush, N. R. (2007). Contextual risk and parenting as predictors of effortful control and social competence in preschool children. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 28(1), 40-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2006.10.001 doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2006.10.001 URL pmid: 21687825
[33]	Liang, Y., Zhou, N., Cao, H., Li, J., & Bao, R. (2024). Revisiting implications of early family economic conditions for adolescent adaptations: An integrative cascade model. Journal of Family Psychology, 38(1), 174-188. https://doi.org/10.1037/fam0001124 doi: 10.1037/fam0001124 URL
[34]	Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta- analysis (pp. ix, 247). Sage Publications.
[35]	Lurie, L. A., Hagen, M. P., McLaughlin, K. A., Sheridan, M. A., Meltzoff, A. N., & Rosen, M. L. (2021). Mechanisms linking socioeconomic status and academic achievement in early childhood: Cognitive stimulation and language. Cognitive Development, 58, 101045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2021.101045 doi: 10.1016/j.cogdev.2021.101045 URL
[36]	Masarik, A. S., & Conger, R. D. (2017). Stress and child development: A review of the family stress model. Current Opinion in Psychology, 13, 85-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.05.008 doi: S2352-250X(16)30054-9 URL pmid: 28813301
[37]	Matte-Gagné, C., & Bernier, A. (2011). Prospective relations between maternal autonomy support and child executive functioning: Investigating the mediating role of child language ability. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 110(4), 611-625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2011.06.006 doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2011.06.006 URL pmid: 21798554
[38]	Matte-Gagné, C., Bernier, A., & Lalonde, G. (2015). Stability in maternal autonomy support and child executive functioning. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24(9), 2610-2619. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-014-0063-9 doi: 10.1007/s10826-014-0063-9 URL
[39]	Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (2012). The nature and organization of individual differences in executive functions: Four general conclusions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(1), 8-14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411429458 URL pmid: 22773897
[40]	Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 49-100. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1999.0734 doi: 10.1006/cogp.1999.0734 URL pmid: 10945922
[41]	National Institutes of Health. (2014). Study quality assessment tools. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health. https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/healthtopics/study-quality-assessment-tools
[42]	Nigg, J. T. (2017). Annual research review: On the relations among self-regulation, self-control, executive functioning, effortful control, cognitive control, impulsivity, risk-taking, and inhibition for developmental psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 58(4), 361-383. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12675 doi: 10.1111/jcpp.2017.58.issue-4 URL
[43]	Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., … Moher, D. (2021). Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews: Development of the PRISMA 2020 statement. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 134, 103-112. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.02.003 pmid: 33577987
[44]	Paulhus, D., L., & Vazire, S. (2007). The self-report method. In R. W.Robins, R. C.Fraley, & R. F.Krueger (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in personality psychology (pp. 224-239). The Guilford Press.
[45]	Rakesh, D., McLaughlin, K. A., Sheridan, M., Humphreys, K. L., & Rosen, M. L. (2024). Environmental contributions to cognitive development: The role of cognitive stimulation. Developmental Review, 73, 101135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2024.101135 doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2024.101135 URL
[46]	Rodgers, M. A., & Pustejovsky, J. E. (2021). Evaluating meta-analytic methods to detect selective reporting in the presence of dependent effect sizes. Psychological Methods, 26(2), 141-160. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000300 doi: 10.1037/met0000300 URL
[47]	Rosen, M. L., Amso, D., & McLaughlin, K. A. (2019). The role of the visual association cortex in scaffolding prefrontal cortex development: A novel mechanism linking socioeconomic status and executive function. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 39, 100699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2019.100699 doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2019.100699 URL
[48]	Rosen, M. L., Hagen, M. P., Lurie, L. A., Miles, Z. E., Sheridan, M. A., Meltzoff, A. N., & McLaughlin, K. A. (2020). Cognitive stimulation as a mechanism linking socioeconomic status with executive function: A longitudinal investigation. Child Development, 91(4), e762-e779. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13315 doi: 10.1111/cdev.13315 URL
[49]	Rosen, M. L., Lurie, L. A., Sambrook, K. A., Meltzoff, A. N., & McLaughlin, K. A. (2021). Neural mechanisms underlying the income-achievement gap: The role of the ventral visual stream. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 52, 101025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2021.101025 doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2021.101025 URL
[50]	Rosenthal, R. (1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86(3), 638-641. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638 doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638 URL
[51]	Rothstein, H. R. (2008). Publication bias as a threat to the validity of meta-analytic results. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 4(1), 61-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11292-007-9046-9
[52]	Schwarze, C. E., von der Heiden, S., Wallwiener, S., & Pauen, S. (2024). The role of perinatal maternal symptoms of depression, anxiety and pregnancy-specific anxiety for infant’s self-regulation: A prospective longitudinal study. Journal of Affective Disorders, 346, 144-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2023.10.035 doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2023.10.035 URL
[53]	Sharma, L., Markon, K. E., & Clark, L. A. (2014). Toward a theory of distinct types of “impulsive” behaviors: A meta- analysis of self-report and behavioral measures. Psychological Bulletin, 140(2), 374-408. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034418 doi: 10.1037/a0034418 URL pmid: 24099400
[54]	Skinner, E., Johnson, S., & Snyder, T. (2005). Six dimensions of parenting: A motivational model. Parenting: Science and Practice, 5(2), 175-235. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327922par0502_3 doi: 10.1207/s15327922par0502_3 URL
[55]	Valcan, D. S., Davis, H., & Pino-Pasternak, D. (2018). Parental behaviours predicting early childhood executive functions: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(3), 607-649. doi: 10.1007/s10648-017-9411-9
[56]	Viechtbauer, W. (2005). Bias and efficiency of meta-analytic variance estimators in the random-effects model. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 30(3), 261-293. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986030003261 doi: 10.3102/10769986030003261 URL
[57]	Viechtbauer, W. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36(3), 1-48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v036.i03
[58]	Vrantsidis, D. M., Clark, C. A. C., Chevalier, N., Espy, K. A., & Wiebe, S. A. (2020). Socioeconomic status and executive function in early childhood: Exploring proximal mechanisms. Developmental Science, 23(3), e12917. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12917 doi: 10.1111/desc.v23.3 URL
[59]	Wang, S., Huang, J., Xie, H., Liu, C., & Wang, X. (2024). Maternal depression and children’s behavioral self- regulation: The role of parenting and children’s screen time. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 241. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02705-2 doi: 10.1057/s41599-024-02705-2 URL
[60]	Waters, N. E., Ahmed, S. F., & Davis-Kean, P. E. (2025). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: Developmental pathways through parenting and children’s executive functions. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 260, 106335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2025.106335 doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2025.106335 URL
[61]	Willoughby, M., T., & Blair, C. B. (2016). Longitudinal measurement of executive function in preschoolers. In J. A.Griffin, P.McCardle, & L. S.Freund (Eds.), Executive function in preschool-age children: Integrating measurement, neurodevelopment, and translational research (pp. 91-113). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14797-005
[62]	Xing, X., Liu, X., & Wang, M. (2019). Parental warmth and harsh discipline as mediators of the relations between family SES and Chinese preschooler’s inhibitory control. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 48, 237-245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.12.018 doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.12.018 URL
[63]	Yin, K., Wu, Q., & Gai, X. (2024). Comparative analysis between directly measured and parent-evaluated executive function: Predicting children’s academic achievement and social development in a one-year longitudinal study. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 17, 2255-2270. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S461720 doi: 10.2147/PRBM.S461720 URL pmid: 38855480
[64]	Zelazo, P. D., & Carlson, S. M. (2012). Hot and cool executive function in childhood and adolescence: Development and plasticity. Child Development Perspectives, 6(4), 354-360. doi: 10.1111/j.1750-8606.2012.00246.x URL

中英文	变量	检索关键词
英文检索词	家庭认知刺激	“cognitive stimulation” OR “home” OR “parent*” OR “mother” OR “father” OR “Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment” OR “HOME inventory” OR “home environment” OR family
	父母心理困扰	心理困扰: “psychological distress” OR “mental health” OR “depressive symptoms” OR depression OR anxiety OR stress 父母：parent* OR mother* OR father* OR caregiver* OR patern* OR matern*
	养育风格	parent* OR patern* OR matern* OR father OR mother OR “parent-child interaction”
	执行功能	“executive function” OR “cognitive flexibility” OR “working memory” OR “inhibitory control” OR “self regulation”
中文检索词	父母	父亲 + 母亲 + 父母 + 家长 + 家庭
中文检索词	执行功能	执行功能 + 工作记忆 + 抑制控制 + 认知灵活性 + 自我调节

中英文	变量	检索关键词
英文检索词	家庭认知刺激	“cognitive stimulation” OR “home” OR “parent*” OR “mother” OR “father” OR “Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment” OR “HOME inventory” OR “home environment” OR family
	父母心理困扰	心理困扰: “psychological distress” OR “mental health” OR “depressive symptoms” OR depression OR anxiety OR stress 父母：parent* OR mother* OR father* OR caregiver* OR patern* OR matern*
	养育风格	parent* OR patern* OR matern* OR father OR mother OR “parent-child interaction”
	执行功能	“executive function” OR “cognitive flexibility” OR “working memory” OR “inhibitory control” OR “self regulation”
中文检索词	父母	父亲 + 母亲 + 父母 + 家长 + 家庭
中文检索词	执行功能	执行功能 + 工作记忆 + 抑制控制 + 认知灵活性 + 自我调节

调节变量	k	Fisher' Z		β		r	F	p
调节变量	k	数值	95% CI	数值	95% CI	r	F	p
EF测量成分	164						1.67	0.145
综合EF	44	0.14	[0.09, 0.18]			0.14
认知灵活性	24	0.17	[0.11, 0.22]	0.03	[−0.03, 0.10]	0.17
延迟满足	12	0.16	[0.10, 0.23]	0.03	[−0.05, 0.10]	0.16
抑制控制	51	0.13	[0.08, 0.17]	−0.01	[−0.07, 0.05]	0.12
认知灵活性+抑制控制	13	0.25	[0.16, 0.34]	0.11	[−0.01, 0.21]	0.24
工作记忆	20	0.16	[0.12, 0.21]	0.03	[−0.03, 0.09]	0.16
冷热EF	126						0.00	0.982
冷EF	114	0.15	[0.11, 0.19]			0.15
热EF	12	0.15	[0.09, 0.22]	0.00	[−0.06, 0.06]	0.15
EF测量方式	170						0.21	0.646
直接测量	161	0.15	[0.12, 0.18]			0.15
间接测量	9	0.16	[0.09, 0.24]	0.02	[−0.06, 0.09]	0.16
家庭认知刺激测量方式	169						3.23	0.024
问卷	62	0.11	[0.07, 0.15]			0.11
视频	79	0.15	[0.11, 0.19]	0.04	[−0.02, 0.09]	0.15
家访	26	0.24	[0.17, 0.31]	0.13	[0.04, 0.21]	0.23
电话访谈	2	0.08	[−0.14, 0.29]	−0.04	[−0.26, 0.19]	0.08
认知刺激种类	170						1.13	0.338
家庭材料和活动	67	0.13	[0.09, 0.18]			0.13
脚手架	53	0.16	[0.10, 0.22]	0.03	[−0.05, 0.10]	0.16
语言输入	18	0.10	[0.04, 0.17]	−0.03	[−0.09, 0.03]	0.10
认知刺激(不区分)	32	0.19	[0.12, 0.25]	0.05	[−0.03, 0.13]	0.18
研究类型	170						0.64	0.424
横断研究	89	0.15	[0.12, 0.19]			0.15
纵向研究	81	0.14	[0.11, 0.18]	−0.01	[−0.05, 0.02]	0.14
家庭认知刺激测量年龄段	170						0.97	0.381
0~36个月(不包含36)	30	0.18	[0.12, 0.24]			0.18
36~60个月	90	0.13	[0.09, 0.17]	−0.05	[−0.13, 0.02]	0.13
60个月以上(不包含60)	50	0.16	[0.10, 0.21]	−0.03	[−0.11, 0.06]	0.15
EF测量年龄段	170						1.24	0.293
0~36个月(不包含36)	12	0.15	[0.07, 0.23]			0.150
36~60个月	91	0.16	[0.13, 0.20]	0.01	[−0.06, 0.09]	0.16
60个月以上(不包含60)	67	0.12	[0.08, 0.17]	−0.03	[−0.12, 0.06]	0.12

调节变量	k	Fisher' Z		β		r	F	p
调节变量	k	数值	95% CI	数值	95% CI	r	F	p
EF测量成分	164						1.67	0.145
综合EF	44	0.14	[0.09, 0.18]			0.14
认知灵活性	24	0.17	[0.11, 0.22]	0.03	[−0.03, 0.10]	0.17
延迟满足	12	0.16	[0.10, 0.23]	0.03	[−0.05, 0.10]	0.16
抑制控制	51	0.13	[0.08, 0.17]	−0.01	[−0.07, 0.05]	0.12
认知灵活性+抑制控制	13	0.25	[0.16, 0.34]	0.11	[−0.01, 0.21]	0.24
工作记忆	20	0.16	[0.12, 0.21]	0.03	[−0.03, 0.09]	0.16
冷热EF	126						0.00	0.982
冷EF	114	0.15	[0.11, 0.19]			0.15
热EF	12	0.15	[0.09, 0.22]	0.00	[−0.06, 0.06]	0.15
EF测量方式	170						0.21	0.646
直接测量	161	0.15	[0.12, 0.18]			0.15
间接测量	9	0.16	[0.09, 0.24]	0.02	[−0.06, 0.09]	0.16
家庭认知刺激测量方式	169						3.23	0.024
问卷	62	0.11	[0.07, 0.15]			0.11
视频	79	0.15	[0.11, 0.19]	0.04	[−0.02, 0.09]	0.15
家访	26	0.24	[0.17, 0.31]	0.13	[0.04, 0.21]	0.23
电话访谈	2	0.08	[−0.14, 0.29]	−0.04	[−0.26, 0.19]	0.08
认知刺激种类	170						1.13	0.338
家庭材料和活动	67	0.13	[0.09, 0.18]			0.13
脚手架	53	0.16	[0.10, 0.22]	0.03	[−0.05, 0.10]	0.16
语言输入	18	0.10	[0.04, 0.17]	−0.03	[−0.09, 0.03]	0.10
认知刺激(不区分)	32	0.19	[0.12, 0.25]	0.05	[−0.03, 0.13]	0.18
研究类型	170						0.64	0.424
横断研究	89	0.15	[0.12, 0.19]			0.15
纵向研究	81	0.14	[0.11, 0.18]	−0.01	[−0.05, 0.02]	0.14
家庭认知刺激测量年龄段	170						0.97	0.381
0~36个月(不包含36)	30	0.18	[0.12, 0.24]			0.18
36~60个月	90	0.13	[0.09, 0.17]	−0.05	[−0.13, 0.02]	0.13
60个月以上(不包含60)	50	0.16	[0.10, 0.21]	−0.03	[−0.11, 0.06]	0.15
EF测量年龄段	170						1.24	0.293
0~36个月(不包含36)	12	0.15	[0.07, 0.23]			0.150
36~60个月	91	0.16	[0.13, 0.20]	0.01	[−0.06, 0.09]	0.16
60个月以上(不包含60)	67	0.12	[0.08, 0.17]	−0.03	[−0.12, 0.06]	0.12

调节变量	k	Fisher' Z		β		r	F	p
调节变量	k	数值	95% CI	数值	95% CI	r	F	p
EF测量成分	162						1.99	0.071
工作记忆	14	−0.11	[−0.16, −0.06]			−0.11
注意力	6	−0.08	[−0.13, −0.03]	0.03	[−0.02, 0.07]	−0.08
认知灵活性	16	−0.06	[−0.12, −0.01]	0.04	[0.00, 0.09]	−0.06
延迟满足	6	−0.19	[−0.29, −0.08]	−0.08	[−0.19, 0.03]	−0.19
综合EF	64	−0.11	[−0.15, −0.07]	0.00	[−0.07, 0.07]	−0.11
抑制控制	48	−0.07	[−0.11, −0.03]	0.04	[0.00, 0.07]	−0.07
计划性	8	−0.06	[−0.12, 0.00]	0.05	[0.00, 0.09]	−0.06
冷热EF	164						1.35	0.248
冷EF	158	−0.09	[−0.13, −0.05]			−0.09
热EF	6	−0.15	[−0.25, −0.05]	−0.06	[−0.16, 0.04]	−0.15
EF测量方式	164						9.72	0.002
直接测量	136	−0.09	[−0.12, −0.06]			−0.08
间接测量	28	−0.15	[−0.19, −0.11]	−0.06	[−0.10, −0.02]	−0.15
父母心理困扰类型	162						3.01	0.052
抑郁	145	−0.10	[−0.13, −0.07]			−0.10
焦虑	11	−0.08	[−0.13, −0.03]	0.02	[−0.02, 0.07]	−0.08
心理困扰	6	−0.23	[−0.34, −0.12]	−0.13	[−0.24, −0.02]	−0.23
测量对象区分	164						0.10	0.906
父亲	4	−0.10	[−0.20, 0.01]			−0.10
母亲	149	−0.10	[−0.13, −0.07]	0.00	[−0.10, 0.10]	−0.10
不区分	11	−0.12	[−0.22, −0.03]	−0.03	[−0.17, 0.12]	−0.12
研究类型	164						0.67	0.415
横断研究	38	−0.09	[−0.13, −0.06]			−0.10
纵向研究	126	−0.11	[−0.14, −0.08]	−0.01	[−0.04, 0.02]	−0.12
EF测量年龄段	164						0.44	0.65
0~36个月(不包含36)	14	−0.12	[−0.20, −0.05]			−0.12
36~60个月	73	−0.09	[−0.13, −0.05]	0.03	[−0.05, 0.11]	−0.09
60个月以上(不包含60)	77	−0.11	[−0.16, −0.07]	0.01	[−0.07, 0.10]	−0.11
心理困扰测量阶段	160						0.49	0.747
怀孕前	9	−0.09	[−0.17, −0.02]			−0.09
妊娠期	23	−0.12	[−0.16, −0.08]	−0.03	[−0.11, 0.05]	−0.12
0~36个月(不包含36)	70	−0.10	[−0.13, −0.07]	−0.01	[−0.08, 0.07]	−0.10
36~60个月	40	−0.09	[−0.13, −0.06]	0.00	[−0.08, 0.08]	−0.09
60个月以上(不包含60)	18	−0.09	[−0.14, −0.05]	0.00	[−0.08, 0.08]	−0.09