Moulding environmental contexts to optimise neurodiverse executive function performance and development: A goodness‐of‐fit account

Hendry, Alexandra; Scerif, Gaia · 2023 · Crossref

DOI: 10.1002/icd.2448

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This commentary by Hendry and Scerif (2023) addresses the variability in children’s executive function (EF) performance by proposing a “goodness-of-fit” account. The authors argue that an individual’s EF ability at any given moment exists within a range between their upper-limit capacity (constrained by genetics, age, and biology) and their lower-limit performance. The central research question concerns how environmental contexts, individual differences, and caregiver interactions determine whether a child performs near their upper or lower limit, thereby influencing their “actualised” EF ability—the performance level demonstrated in daily life. This framework is motivated by the need to better interpret EF measures and design interventions that account for the dynamic interplay between neurodiverse children and their environments. The paper synthesizes existing literature to outline how environmental stressors, such as noise pollution and adverse childhood experiences, can constrain EF by pulling performance toward the lower limit through increased attentional load and physiological stress responses. Conversely, enriching environments support development toward the upper limit. The authors highlight that neurodivergent children, such as those with ADHD or autism, are disproportionately affected by poor environmental fit because standard classroom norms often clash with their sensory or attentional needs. Consequently, these children may frequently operate at their lower-limit EF in school settings, leading to a widening gap in observed abilities compared to neurotypical peers, despite potentially having similar upper-limit capacities. Caregivers and educators are identified as critical moderators who can improve goodness-of-fit through accommodations, such as sensory adjustments or autonomy-supportive parenting. The findings suggest that discrepancies between lab-based EF measures and observer ratings are informative rather than mere noise. Lab measures often capture upper-limit ability under optimal conditions, while observer ratings reflect actualised ability in naturalistic settings. Low agreement between parent and teacher ratings may indicate a mismatch between the child’s needs and one of those environments. The authors note that children who only practice specific EF skills in sub-optimal conditions may develop “spikey profiles,” where strengths in one domain (e.g., inhibitory control) outpace others (e.g., working memory) due to differential environmental support. The significance of this work lies in its implications for EF measurement and intervention. The authors recommend using multiple measurement types across varied contexts to accurately estimate actualised EF. For interventions, they argue that effective strategies must raise actualised EF performance by improving day-to-day environmental fit, embedding EF practice in ecologically valid contexts, and helping children modulate physiological stress responses. The authors emphasize that sustainable and equitable solutions require combining societal-level changes, such as reducing noise pollution, with individual-focused supports, particularly for neurodivergent populations.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-26; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• executive function