Features of the formation of cognitive and psychophysiological functions in children: experience of using a new software package

Aim of the study: to determine the features of the formation of psychophysiological and cognitive functions in 6–17 year children using a comprehensive and screening software of the original package of the complex “Psychomat”.

Materials and methods. A screening examination of 184 apparently healthy  6–17 year schoolchildren was carried out using a complex of psychophysiological tests and original methods for studying higher mental functions (24 tests, 66 parameters). To verify the screening program, a comprehensive examination of 60 apparently healthy schoolchildren of the same age was carried out.

Results. The patterns of formation of cognitive and psychophysiological functions in 6–17 year children have been established. No gender differences were found in the analysis of cognitive and psychophysiological functions in children. Significant differences in the rate of formation of psychophysiological functions have been identified in children of primary school age (8–10 years) and are associated mainly with the speed of response and coordination. As the age of children increases, test parameters reflecting the characteristics of perception, memory, attention, analytical and synthetic processes also undergo changes: both the total and average time for completing tasks and the number of errors decrease, and the pace of execution increases.

Conclusion. The original software package «Psychomat» allows using comprehensive and screening assessment of both psychophysiological and cognitive functions in 6–17 year children. The screening software as the sensitive method for detecting violations of psychophysiological and cognitive functions in the conditions of a mass examination of children  can be used as a test system.

Contributions:
Uvakina E.V., Kuzenkova L.M. — concept and design of the research;
Uvakina E.V., Popovich S.G. — collection and processing of materials;
Uvakina E.V. — text writing;
Kuzenkova L.M., Fisenko A.P. — editing.
All co-authors — approval of the final version of the article, responsibility for the integrity of all its parts.

Acknowledgment. The study had no sponsorship.

Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Received: December 14, 2021
Accepted: December 17, 2021
Published: December 29, 2021

1. Nugent N.R., Pendse S.R., Schatten H.T., Armey M.F. Innovations in technology and mechanisms of change in behavioral interventions. Behav. Modif. 2019; 145445519845603. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445519845603

2. Werner-Seidler A., Huckvale K., Larsen M.E., Calear A.L., Maston K., Johnston L., et al. A trial protocol for the effectiveness of digital interventions for preventing depression in adolescents: The Future Proofing Study. Trials. 2020; 21(1): 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-019-3901-7

3. Sobolev M., Vitale R., Wen H., Kizer J., Leeman R., Pollak J.P., et al. The Digital Marshmallow Test (DMT) diagnostic and monitoring mobile health app for impulsive behavior: Development and Validation Study. JMIR mHealth uHealth. 2021; 9(1): e25018. https://doi.org/10.2196/25018

4. Cardoso-Leite P., Buchard A., Tissieres I., Mussack D., Bavelier D. Media use, attention, mental health and academic performance among 8 to 12 year old children. PLoS One. 2021; 16(11): e0259163. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259163

5. Dempsey A.G., Barton A.K., Duncan A.F. Differences in performance on developmental tasks in young children across digital and paper-based modalities: A Feasibility Trial. J. Dev. Behav. Pediatr. 2018; 39(9): 726–35. https://doi.org/10.1097/DBP.0000000000000618

6. Hyun G.J., Park J.W., Kim J.H., Min K.J., Lee Y.S., Kim S.M., et al. Visuospatial working memory assessment using a digital tablet in adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 2018; 157: 137–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2018.01.022

7. Kotrla Topić M., Šakić Velić M., Merkaš M. Tablet and smartphone or a book: the struggle between digital media and literacy environment in homes of Croatian preschool children and its effect on letter recognition. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 2020; 23(6): 412–7. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2019.0482

8. Uvakina E.V., Kuzenkova L.M., Popovich S.G. Original software package for psychophysiological and cognitive functions analysis of children. Rossiyskiy pediatricheskiy zhurnal. 2021; 24(5): 300–10. https://doi.org/10.46563/1560-9561-2021-24-5-300-310 (in Russian)

9. Smirnov I.E., Stepanov A.A., Shakina L.D., Belyaeva I.A., Bombardirova E.P., Kucherenko A.G. Neurological manifestations of cerebral ischemia in infants at 1 year of age. Rossiyskiy pediatricheskiy zhurnal. 2016; 19(5): 274–82. https://doi.org/10.18821/1560-9561-2016-19(5)-274-282 (in Russian)

10. Kuchma V.R., Sukhareva L.M., Nadezhdin D.S., Sakharov V.G. Comparative analysis of psychophysiological development of adolescents. Rossiyskiy pediatricheskiy zhurnal. 2015; 18(2): 23–7. https://doi.org/10.18821/1560-9561-2015-18-2-23-27 (in Russian)

11. Kuchma V.R., Sukhareva L.M., Nadezhdin D.S., Sakharov V.G., Goncharova G.A. The study of the psychophysiological and psychosocial characteristics of 9–11th grade students of secondary school. Rossiyskiy pediatricheskiy zhurnal. 2017; 20(6): 346–53. https://doi.org/10.18821/1560-9561-2017-20-6-346-353 (in Russian)

12. Kochhann R., Gonçalves H.A., Pureza J.D.R., Viapiana V.F., Fonseca F.D.P., Salles J.F., et al. Variability in neurocognitive performance: аge, gender, and school-related differences in children and from ages 6 to 12. Appl. Neuropsychol. Child. 2018; 7(3): 277–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622965.2017.1312403

13. Luria A.R. Fundamentals of Neuropsychology [Osnovy neyropsikhologii]. Moscow: Akademiya; 2003. (in Russian)

14. Fischer-Baum S., Campana G. Neuroplasticity and the logic of cognitive neuropsychology. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 2017; 34(7-8): 403–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643294.2017.1389707

15. Hokkanen L., Barbosa F., Ponchel A., Constantinou M., Kosmidis M.H., Varako N., et al. Clinical neuropsychology as a specialist profession in European health care: Developing a benchmark for training standards and competencies using the EuroPsy model? Front. Psychol. 2020; 11: 559134. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.559134

16. Swagerman S.C., de Geus E.J.C., Kan K.J., van Bergen E., Nieuwboer H.A., Koenis M.M.G., et al. The Computerized Neurocognitive Battery: validation, aging effects, and heritability across cognitive domains. Neuropsychology. 2016; 30(1): 53–64. https://doi.org/10.1037/neu0000248

17. Honarmand K., Malik S., Wild C., Gonzalez-Lara L.E., McIntyre C.W., Owen A.M., et al. Feasibility of a web-based neurocognitive battery for assessing cognitive function in critical illness survivors. PLoS One. 2019; 14(4): e0215203. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215203

18. Ortuño-Sierra J., Aritio-Solana R., Fonseca-Pedrero E. New evidences about subjective well-being in adolescence and its links with neurocognitive performance. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2020; 17(6): 1866. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17061866

19. Kohls G., Baumann S., Gundlach M., Scharke W., Bernhard A., Martinelli A., et al. Investigating sex differences in emotion recognition, learning, and regulation among youths with conduct disorder. J. Am. Acad. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry. 2020; 59(2): 263–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2019.04.003

20. Kim M.J., Park H.Y., Yoo E.Y., Kim J.R. Effects of a cognitive-functional intervention method on improving executive function and self-directed learning in school-aged children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: A Single-Subject Design Study. Occup. Ther. Int. 2020; 2020: 1250801. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/1250801

21. Barlow-Krelina E., Fabri T.L., O’Mahony J., Gur R.C., Gur R.E., De Somma E., et al. Examining cognitive speed and accuracy dysfunction in youth and young adults with pediatric-onset multiple sclerosis using a computerized neurocognitive battery. Neuropsychology. 2021; 35(4): 388–98. https://doi.org/10.1037/neu0000729

22. Rodriguez-Toscano E., López G., Mayoral M., Lewis S., Lees J., Drake R., et al. A longitudinal comparison of two neurocognitive test batteries in patients with schizophrenia and healthy volunteers: Time effects on neuropsychological performance and their relation to functional outcome. Schizophr. Res. 2020; 216: 347–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2019.11.018

23. Williams A.M., Cheung Y.T., Hyun G., Liu W., Ness K.K., Ehrhardt M.J., et al. Childhood neurotoxicity and brain resilience to adverse events during adulthood. Ann. Neurol. 2021; 89(3): 534–45. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.25981