Daily Performance of Adolescents with Executive Function Deficits: An Empirical Study Using a Complex-Cooking Task

Table 3

Differences between groups in the Children’s Cooking Task assessment.

	EFD group; (); (%)	TD group; (); (%)
Have you performed cooking tasks in the past?	Yes: 36 (87.7)	Yes: 38 (95.7)	1.32	.25
Are you allowed to experiment with home cooking activities?	Yes: 28 (68.3)	Yes: 32 (80.0)	1.47	.47
Qualitative rating
Goal achievement	No: 21 (51.2)	No: 6 (15.0)	11.90	<.010
Dangerous behavior	Yes: 18 (43.9)	Yes: 2 (5.0)	16.47	<.001
Intervention of adult	Yes: 19 (46.3)	Yes: 3 (7.5)	15.44	<.001
	EFD group ()	TD group ()	Mann-Whitney test
	[ (min–max)]
Task duration (min)	27.87 [12.22 (11–75)]	21.52[5.32 (14–47)]	2.91	<.001
Total number of errors	44.41 [25.43 (12–135)]	9.98 [5.90 (2–28)]	7.33	<.001	.72
Descriptive analysis
(1) omissions	2.54 [1.88 (0–8)]	0.73 [1.01 (0–4)]	5.10	<.001	.73
(2) additions	13.22 [9.15 (1–51)]	1.63 [1.39 (0–6)]	7.27	<.001	.72
(3) substitutions-sequences	5.32 [3.08 (0–11)]	1.75 [1.42 (0–4)]	5.37	<.001	.73
(4) estimation	5.63 [2.40 (0–10)]	1.00 [1.51 (0–6)]	6.84	<.001	.72
(5) commentary-question	18.88 [20.54 (0–113)]	4.90 [4.57 (0–21)]	4.03	<.001	.73
Neuropsychological analysis
(N1) control errors	7.80 [4.56 (1–21)]	1.60 [1.80 (0–8)]	6.55	<.001	.72
(N2) context neglect	31.27 [21.24 (8–120)]	7.73 [5.12 (1-24)]	6.96	<.001	.72
(N3) environmental adherence	5.20 [3.87 (0–23)]	1.53 [1.46 (0–7)]	5.72	<.001	.73
(N4) purposeless action	6.22 [5.65 (0–20)]	0.58 [0.87 (0–4)]	6.37	<.001	.72
(N5) dependency	5.58 [4.18 (0–17)]	1.75 [1.41 (0–5)]	5.29	<.001	.73
(N6) inappropriate behavior	0.63 [1.09 (0–4)]	0.03 [0.15 (0–1)]	3.67	<.001	.73

Note: EFD: group with executive function deficits; TD: group with typical development; : mean; : standard deviation.