Executive Function Profiles in Children with Special Educational Needs: A Transdiagnostic Approach

Background/Objectives: Executive Functions are high-order cognitive processes, fundamental for children’s development, often shown diminished in children with Special Educational Needs (SEN). Although literature is consistent in finding these difficulties in children with SEN, the high individual heterogeneity translates into different results within conditions. The present exploratory study addresses this heterogeneity, by using a transdiagnostic person-centered approach, to identify executive profiles across different conditions and to link them to traditional diagnostic labels. Additionally, the relationship between those profiles and sociodemographic characteristics, such as age and gender was explored. Method: A total of 185 children (mean age 9.8; SD = 2.61) with diverse SEN diagnoses were assessed: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (n = 64; mean age 10.92; SD = 2.16), Intellectual disabilities (n = 23; mean age 12.65; SD = 1.37), Developmental Language Disorder (n = 64; mean age 7.28; SD = 1.25), Learning disabilities (n = 13; mean age 10.38; SD = 2.06), and Autism Spectrum Disorder (n = 21; mean age 10.57; SD = 1.96). Participants were tested with the Yellow-Red battery test, measuring cognitive and behavioural inhibition; verbal and non-verbal working memory; and cognitive flexibility. Data were analysed by applying Latent Profile analyses. Results: Four different profiles emerged: Specific Inhibition Deficit; Severe Executive Deficit; Mild Executive Deficit; and Average Executive Performance. Results showed a high heterogeneity within and a large overlap between the different conditions. Nevertheless, some conditions constituted a high proportion of certain profiles. For instance, Intellectual disabilities accounted for 70% of the Severe Executive Deficit profile. Although age showed a significant relationship to profile membership, gender did not. Conclusions: Executive Functions operate as cognitive processes that cross multiple diagnoses, rather than as markers for specific conditions. The results highlight the relevance of focusing on individual cognitive profiles, rather than traditional labels and diagnoses, whenever designing and implementing educational interventions.