{"paper_id":"069033d1-340d-4d94-bba9-b92a15e97d17","body_text":"Parental Companionship Shapes Children's Attentional Functions and Academic Achievement | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Parental Companionship Shapes Children's Attentional Functions and Academic Achievement Xuanxiao Huo, Liuyi Du, Tingting Wu, Caiqi Chen This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6324909/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 7 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Parental companionship plays a crucial role in children's development, yet its specific impact on children's attention remains not well understood. This study investigated how parental companionship influences children’s attention and academic achievement through two studies. Study 1 (questionnaire) revealed that positive parental companionship (communication and interaction, accompanying) enhanced attention and academic performance, while parental interference had negative effects. Attention fully mediated the effects of accompanying and interference on academic performance and partially mediated communication and interaction’s impact. Study 2(Attention Network Test) found that children with low parental companionship exhibited higher alerting effects and marginally lower orienting effects compared to high companionship groups, with no differences in executive control. These results demonstrate that effective parental companionship enhances students' attention functions through multiple pathways, ultimately contributing to improved academic achievement. This research advances theoretical understanding of how family context shapes children's cognitive development through attentional processes. Parental companionship Attention Cognitive development Academic performance Elementary school students Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 1 Introduction Parental companionship, as a critical dimension of parenting styles and family involvement, encompasses parents' engagement in home-based parent-child activities that provide children with emotional and instrumental support (Epstein, 1990; Zhang, Fu, Jing, & Liao, 2023). Research suggests that parental companionship influences children's development through both cognitive and non-cognitive pathways (Cheng & Zhou, 2023; Wu, Yu, & Xu, 2023; Zhang et al., 2023). The cognitive pathway involves the development of fundamental mental processes such as attention, memory, and problem-solving abilities, while the non-cognitive pathway encompasses psychological attributes such as self-discipline, learning confidence, and locus of control (Vittadini, 2022). Existing research has predominantly examined non-cognitive mechanisms, demonstrating how parent-child interactions enhance academic outcomes through the development of learning confidence and internal locus of control (Cheng & Zhou, 2023; Duckworth & Seligman, 2005; Yang, Qian, & Xia, 2024). However, cognitive pathways through which parental companionship shapes children's development has received relatively little attention, despite their fundamental importance in children's developmental trajectories. The need to understand cognitive pathways becomes particularly compelling in the context of academic achievement, where cognitive abilities serve as fundamental building blocks for learning. Over the past decade, extensive research has documented that parental companionship plays a crucial role in children's academic development and has long-term impacts on future achievements (Behrman et al., 2017; Benner, Boyle, & Sadler, 2016; Datu & Buenconsejo, 2021; Palacios et al., 2019; Roeser, Eccles, & Strobel, 1998). Specifically, studies have shown that time investment of in parent-child interactions can positively affect children's academic performance (Duckworth & Seligman, 2005). This influence manifests through multiple channels: parental companionship enhances students' academic engagement through improved attendance, and learning orientation/learning (Haynes, 1989), strengths behavioral and emotional engagement involvement in learning activities (Wang, Hill, & Hofkens, 2014), and notably, can counteract the typical decline in learning interest during adolescence (Jensen, Whiteman, Bernard, & McHale, 2017). Given that cognitive processes are essential for academic learning activities, from understanding new concepts to solving complex problems, examining how parental companionship might enhance children's cognitive abilities represents a promising direction for understanding its benefits on academic achievement. A deeper understanding of these cognitive pathways could not only advance theoretical knowledge but also help parents develop more targeted strategies to support their children's academic development through quality companionship. Among various cognitive pathways, attention emerges as a particularly promising mediating mechanism linking parental companionship to academic achievement. A substantial body of research has demonstrated that parental companionship significantly influences children's attention development. Studies have shown that positive parental behaviors and attitudes enhance children's attention, while negative parenting behaviors such as parental rejection are associated with attention problems (Barnow et al., 2004) and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) (Breaux & Harvey, 2019; Claussen et al., 2024; Demmer, Puccio, Stokes, McGillivray, & Hooley, 2018; Ellis & Nigg, 2009; Keown, 2012; Rogers, Wiener, Marton, & Tannock, 2009). High levels of parental involvement and warmth can mitigate ADHD-related impairments (Deault, 2010), predict fewer attention problems in later development (Shelleby & Ogg, 2020), reducing inattention during infancy (Hawes, Dadds, Frost, & Russell, 2013), and extend children's attention spans (Yu & Smith, 2016). Meanwhile, attention has been consistently identified as a crucial factor in academic success, with numerous studies documenting its significant positive impact on children's academic performance ( Alavi et al., 2019 ; Flores, Caqueo-Urizar, Lopez, & Acevedo, 2022). Recent research has revealed that cognitive abilities mediate the relationship between parental involvement and students' academic performance (Yang, Qian, & Xia, 2024). Despite these separate lines of evidence suggesting that parental companionship may enhance academic achievement through improved attention, few studies have directly examined attention as a mediating mechanism in this relationship, representing a critical gap in our understanding of how parental companionship benefits children's academic development. Understanding how parental companionship influences attention and subsequently affects academic performance requires a deeper examination of attention's underlying mechanisms. Attention is not a unitary construct but rather a complex cognitive process comprising multiple components. The attentional network theory, developed from cognitive neuroscience research by Posner and Petersen (1990), has provided a sophisticated framework that delineates three distinct attentional networks: alerting (maintenance of vigilance), orienting (selection and orientation of sensory information), and executive control of attention (resolution of cognitive interference). The Fan et al. (2002) developed the Attentional Network Test (ANT) to measure the processing efficiency of these three networks, and through fMRI studies (Fan et al.,2005; Xuan et al.,2016), they confirmed that these attentional functions indeed activate distinct neural networks. This objective cognitive task has been widely employed to study attentional network functions in various research contexts, with numerous studies applying it to examine attentional networks in children and adolescents, both typically developing youth and those with attention difficulties (Johnson et al., 2008; Kratz et al., 2011; Mullane, Corkum, Klein, McLaughlin, & Lawrence, 2011), providing a valuable tool for examining how environmental factors such as parental companionship might differentially affect specific components of attention. The present research employed a two-study approach to address these critical gaps in our understanding of how linking parental companionship to academic achievement. In Study 1, we conducted a large-scale investigation with elementary school students to examine attention as a potential mediating mechanism, addressing the noted absence of research directly testing the attention-mediated pathway between parental companionship and academic achievement. Building upon these findings, Study 2 adopted a more fine-grained analysis using the ANT paradigm to explore how parental companionship might differentially influence the three fundamental attention networks, thereby providing a deeper understanding of the specific attentional processes affected by parent-child interactions. Based on the documented relationships between parental companionship and attention development, we anticipated that higher levels of parental companionship would be associated with enhanced attention capabilities and academic achievement in children. Furthermore, given the established importance of attention in academic learning, we expected attention to mediate the relationship between parental companionship and academic achievement. Given the distinct nature and neural bases of the three attention networks, we also hypothesized that children experiencing different levels of parental companionship would show varying patterns of performance across the alerting, orienting, and executive control networks. 2 Study 1: Examining the Mediating Role of Attention in the Relationship Between Parental Companionship and Academic Performance 2.1 Methods 2.1.1 Participants Using the convenience sampling methods, participants were fifth and sixth-grade students recruited from public elementary schools in Guangzhou, China. In this study, data were collected using offline electronic questionnaires. Of the 1,000 questionnaires distributed, 936 were returned, in which 871 were valid (effective rate of 93.06%). The final sample comprised 451 males (51.78%) and 420 females (48.22%). The study’s purpose was explained to the participants, and therefore confidentiality and voluntary participation were assured. All participants provided written informed consents. Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the School of Psychology, South China Normal University. 2.1.2 Measurements Parental Companionship. Children reported their perceived parental companionship using a 21-items scale. The scale measures four dimensions: two positive dimensions [communication and interaction (10 items) and accompanying (4 items)], and two negative dimensions [neglect (4 items) and interference (3 items)]. Items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = never to 5 = always), with 14 items scored in a positive direction and 7 items reverse-scored (see Table 1 ). Higher total score indicates greater perceived parental companionship. The scale demonstrated good internal consistency, with a Cronbach's α of .884 for the total scale and .892, .740, .733, and .757 for the communication and interaction, accompanying, neglect, and interference subscales, respectively. Table 1 Scale Items. Dimension Items communication and interaction 1. When your father or mother eats with you, you both focus on eating, but also interact with each other at the same time. (For example, discussing the favorite dishes.) 2. Your father or mother asks about your activities at school. 3. Your father or mother inquires about your recent academic progress. 4. Your father or mother takes you to social activities such as visiting relatives and friends. 5. When you achieve good grades, your father or mother praises you. 6. Your father or mother employs various methods to cultivate your initiative and enthusiasm for learning. 7. When you encounter troubles or feel upset, your father or mother comforts and encourages you. 8. When you achieve success in what you do, your father or mother expresses congratulations and pride to you. 9. Your father or mother makes you feel their affection for you through their words, expressions, and actions. 10. Your father or mother will share happiness and sorrow with you. accompanying 1. When you read, your father or mother reads with you. (Both of you read the same book interactively.) 2. When you read, your father or mother accompanies you while you read. (Both of you read your own books.) 3. When you play games, your father or mother plays with you. (Both of you engage in the same activity interactively.) 4. When you play games, your father or mother stays with you while you play. (However, each of you plays your own game, for example, you build with your LEGO, and he/she assembles his/her LEGO.) neglect 1. When you are reading, your father or mother suddenly remembers something they want you to do, and they will ask you to stop reading to take care of it. 2. When your father or mother eats with you, he/she will watch TV/play with a mobile phone or iPad. 3. When you play games, your father or mother will watch TV/play with a mobile phone or iPad. 4. When you talk to your father or mother, he/she will listen to you while also watching TV or playing with a mobile phone or iPad. interference 1. When you play games, your father or mother will nag or scold you. (For example, they might yell at you for being too loud, or for being barefoot, etc.) 2. When you play games, your father or mother will suddenly interrupt your game and ask you to go read a book or do your homework. 3. When you play games, your father or mother will suddenly interrupt your game and ask you to do housework. Attention(Qing, 1999). The scale consists of 10 items rated on a 3-point scale (0 = never able to do it, 1 = sometimes able to do it, 2 = always able to do it). Example items include: “You can read storybooks or comics continuously, and you can watch cartoons on TV in one sitting”, and “When playing games such as hide-and-seek, dodgeball, or tug-of-war, you are able to concentrate until the very end”. Total scores range from 0 to 20, with scores above 14 indicating good attention; between 11–13 indicating moderate attention; and scores below 10 indicating attention difficulties. The scale showed acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .682). Academic performance. Academic performance was assessed using standardized scores (z-scores) from the midterm examinations in three core subjects: Chinese, mathematics, and English. These subjects were selected as they represent the primary academic domains in Chinese elementary education and are consistently used as key indicators of academic achievement in the Chinese educational system (Li et al., 2022). A composite academic performance score was calculated by summing the z-scores of these three subjects. The use of standardized scores allows for meaningful comparisons across different subjects while controlling for potential variations in difficulty levels and scoring criteria between subjects. All statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS 27.0 (RRID: SCR_001905). 2.2 Results 2.2.1 Correlation Analysis Pearson correlation analyses were conducted to examine the relationship among study variables (see Table 2 ). The total parental companionship score was positively correlation between the total score of parental companionship and children's attention ( r = .299, p < .001). Specifically, the positive dimensions of parental companionship showed significant positive correlations with attention (communication and interaction: r = .308, p < .001; accompanying: r = .277, p < .001) and academic performance (communication and interaction: r = .183, p < .001; accompanying: r = .106, p < .01), while the negative dimensions of parental companionship showed significant negative correlations with attention (neglect: r = − .098, p < .001; interference: r = − .113, p < .001) and academic performance (interference: r = − .103, p < .01) . Additionally, both parental companionship and attention demonstrated significant positive correlations with and overall academic performance (parental companionship: r = .166, p < .001; attention: r = .251, p < .001) . Table 2 Descriptive statistical analysis and correlation coefficient for parental companionship and attention. M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 1. Parental Companionship 50.4 13.0 1 2. Communication and Interaction 29.3 6.9 .858 *** 1 3. Accompanying 6.4 3.8 .758 *** .606 *** 1 4. Neglect 9.6 3.7 − .659 *** − .324 *** − .319 *** 1 5. Interference 6.1 3.2 − .566 *** − .241 *** − .225 *** .457 *** 1 6. Attention 15.8 2.6 .299 *** .308 *** .277 *** − .098 ** − .113 *** 1 7. Academic Performance 0.11 2.4 .166 *** .183 *** .106 ** − .045 − .103 ** .251 *** 2.2.2 Mediating Analyses Mediation analyses were conducted following the procedures outlined by Wen et al. (2004). In these analyses, each dimension of parental companionship (communication and interaction, accompanying, and interference) served as independent variables (X), academic performance as the dependent variable (Y), and attention as the mediator (M). Three regression models were tested for each dimension: Model 1 tested the total effect of X on Y, Model 2 examined the effect of X on M, and Model 3 tested both the direct effect of X on Y and the indirect effect through M while controlling for demographic variables. Demographic variables (including the gender of the child and that of the foster parent, whether the child is an only child, place of residence, parental education, and household economic status) were controlled in the following analyses. Results were summarized in Table 3 and Fig. 1 . For the communication and interaction dimension (Fig. 1 a), Model 1 showed a significant total effect on academic performance ( β = .055, p < .001). In Model 2, communication and interaction significantly predicted attention ( β = .111, p < .001). When testing the full mediation model (Model 3), both the direct effect of communication and interaction ( β = .035, p = .004) and the effect of attention ( β = .182, p < .001) on academic performance remained significant, indicating partial mediation. Regarding accompanying (Fig. 1 b), Model 1 revealed a significant total effect on academic performance ( β = .056, p = .010). Model 2 showed that accompanying significantly predicted attention ( β = .185, p < .001). In Model 3, the direct effect of accompanying became non-significant ( β = .019, p = .395) while attention remained a significant predictor of academic performance ( β = .201, p < .001), suggesting full mediation. For the interference dimension (Fig. 1 c), Model 1 demonstrated a significant negative total effect on academic performance ( β = − .054, p = .034). Model 2 showed that interference significantly predicted decreased attention ( β = − .072, p = .011). In the full mediation model (Model 3), the direct effect of interference became non-significant ( β = − .04, p = .116) while attention maintained a significant positive effect on academic performance ( β = .204, p < .001), indicating full mediation. Table 3 Mediation effect test results of attention between communication and interaction, accompanying, interference, and academic performance. Academic Performance (Model 1) Attention (Model 2) Academic Performance (Model 3) β p β p β p Independent variable Communication and Interaction 0.055 < .001 0.111 < .001 0.035 .004 Intermediary variable Attention 0.182 *** < .001 Model F 5.926 9.925 8.402 Adjusted R 2 .059 .101 .093 Independent variable Accompanying 0.056 .010 0.185 < .001 0.019 .395 Intermediary variable Attention 0.201 < .001 N F 4.502 8.725 7.712 Adjusted R 2 .055 .089 .085 Independent variable Interference -0.054 0.034 -0.072 0.011 -0.040 .116 Intermediary variable Attention 0.204 < .001 Model F 4.287 3.294 7.783 Adjusted R 2 .052 .028 .087 Note: The control variables are the gender of the child and that of the foster parent, whether the child is an only child, place of residence, parental education, and household economic status. For the neglect dimension, preliminary analysis showed no significant total effect on academic performance ( β = -0.028, p = .205), thus precluding the need for further mediation analysis. 2.3 Discussion Study 1 confirmed our theoretical expectations regarding the significant impact of parental companionship on children's development. As predicted, positive forms of parental companionship (communication and interaction, and accompanying) promoted both children's attention and academic performance. We also found that the negative companionship behaviors (interference) undermined these developmental outcomes. These contrasting effects underscore the critical role of parental companionship quality in shaping children's cognitive and academic development. The mediation analyses further clarified these relationships by identifying attention as a key mechanism. Attention fully mediated the effect of accompanying and interference on academic performance, suggesting that these parental behaviors primarily influence academic outcomes through their impact on children's attentional processes. For communication and interaction, attention served as a partial mediator, indicating both direct and indirect pathways to academic performance. These findings support our theoretical predictions and align with previous research on parent-child relationships and cognitive development. The positive effects of communication and interaction, as well as stable companionship and support from parents, likely stem from their role in enhancing children's learning motivation and cognitive development. When parents engage in positive companionship behaviors, they may create a supportive learning environment that facilitates the development of attention skills and effective learning strategies. Conversely, parental interference appears to disrupt children's attentional processes, potentially by creating cognitive load or emotional stress that impairs learning. To further understand the specific mechanisms through which parental companionship influences attentional, Study 2 was designed to examine the three distinct attentional network using the ANT. This follow-up study compared children with high versus low levels of parental companionship investigate potential differences in alerting, orienting, and executive control functions of attention. 3 Study 2: Behavioral Experimental on the Attention Network Functions in Children with Different Levels of Parental Companionship 3.1 Methods 3.1.1 Participants and Group Assignment Valid questionnaires were collected from 384 fifth and sixth grade students from two primary schools (118 from Chongqing Chaoyang Primary School and 266 from Guangzhou Petrochemical Primary School). Based on their scores on the Parental Companionship Scale (identical to Study 1), students were assigned to groups using a criterion of ± 1 standard deviation (SD) from the mean ( M = 46.12, SD = 14.19). Students scoring below 32 were assigned to the low companionship group, while though scoring above 60 were assigned to the high companionship group. Initially 61 students from each group were selected to participate in the Attention Network Test (ANT), with 110 successfully completing the experiment (57 in the low companionship group and 53 in the high companionship group). Prior to the experiment, the consent of the guardian of the subject is required and an informed consent form is signed. The guardian must be present during the experiment and has the right to terminate the experiment at any time. Following Nosek and Banaji's (2001) recommendation, participants with accuracy rates below 80% were excluded to prevent the influence of random responding, resulting in a final sample of 106 participants (53 in the low companionship group and 53 in the high companionship group; see Table 4 for their demographic information). Table 4 Descriptive Information of Participants in the Low and High Companionship Groups. Low companionship High companionship N 53 53 Sex (M:F) 18:35 28:25 Age ( M ± SD , in years) 11.30 ± .89 11.09 ± .86 Parental companionship Score ( M ± SD ) 24.38 ± 6.4 64.66 ± 3.1 3.1.2 Materials and Procedure Participants were required to completed the questionnaires and report their academic performance as in Study 1. In the behavioral experiment, the classic Attention Network Test (ANT; Fan et al., 2002) was administered using E-prime 2.0 software (RRID:SCR_009567). Schematic diagram of the time line in each trial of this task was shown in Fig. 2 . Each trial began with a central fixation cross, followed by a cue stimulus after a variable interval (400-1600ms).. Four cue conditions were employed: ( 1 ) no cue, where only the fixation cross remained; ( 2 ) central cue, where an asterisk appeared at the fixation point; ( 3 ) double cue, where two asterisks appearing simultaneously above and below the fixation point; and ( 4 ) spatial cue, where a single asterisk appearing either above or below the fixation point, validly indicating the upcoming target location. The cue was presented for 100ms, followed by a cue-to-target interval for 400ms. The target display was then presented for 400 ms, consisting of a central arrow pointing either left or right, flanked by two arrows on each side. Three flanker conditions were used: ( 1 ) in the congruent condition, all arrows pointed in the same direction (e.g., →→→→→); ( 2 ) in the incongruent condition, the flanking arrows pointed in the opposite direction to the central target (e.g., →→←→→); and ( 3 ) in the neutral condition, the target arrow was flanked by dashes (e.g., --→--). Participants were instructed to indicate the direction of the central target arrow as quickly and accurately as possible using designated response keys. The experiment employed a 4 (cue type: no cue, center cue, double cue, spatial cue) × 3 (flanker type: neutral, congruent, incongruent) within-subjects design. Each combination of conditions appeared equally often, with 24 trials per condition in the experimental blocks. The experimenter provided detailed instructions and answered all questions before participants provided informed consent. Participants then completed on practice block (24 trials) followed by three experimental blocks (96 trials each, totaling 288 trials). Optional breaks were provided between blocks. The entire experiment lasted approximately 30 minutes. Optional breaks were provided between blocks. Three attention network effects in reaction time (RT) were calculated: alerting effect (RT in the no-cue condition minus RT in the central cue condition), orienting effect (RT in the double cue condition minus RT in the spatial cue condition), and executive control effect (RT in the incongruent condition minus RT in the congruent condition), with larger alerting and orienting effect in addition to small executive control effect indicating better function of the corresponding network. For the calculation of mean reaction times in each condition, incorrect responses were excluded, as were trials with RT below 100ms and those exceeding three standard deviations from the mean. The overall accuracy rate was 96.40%, and 91.67% of trials remained after data trimming. Specifically, the low companionship group achieved an accuracy rate of 96.47%, with 91.23% of trials remaining after data trimming. Meanwhile, the high companionship group had an accuracy rate of 96.32%, with 92.16% of trials remaining after data trimming. 3.1.3 Statistical Analyses Age and gender were included as covariates in all analyses to control for their potential influences. For the ANT data, we first conducted independent samples t-tests to compare the three attention network effects (alerting, orienting, and executive control) between the high and low parental companionship groups. For any attention network effect showing significant group differences, we further conducted a 2 (group: high vs. low companionship) × 2 (condition) mixed ANOVA, with group as the between-subjects factor and the two conditions used to calculate that specific effect (e.g., no cue vs. center cue for alerting effect) as the within-subjects factor. This follow-up analysis aimed to determine which specific condition(s) contributed to the observed group differences in the attention network effects. To examine the relationships among attention networks, we calculated Pearson correlations between the three attention network effects separately for each group. Fisher's z-tests were then conducted to determine whether these correlational patterns differed significantly between groups. Finally, independent samples t-tests were conducted to examine group differences in attention questionnaire scores and academic performance. Additionally, we examined the associations between attention questionnaire scores and attention network effects using Pearson correlations, followed by Fisher's z-tests to compare these correlations between groups. Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen's d for t-tests and partial eta-squared for ANOVAs. The significance level was set at p < .05 for all analyses. 3.2 Results 3.2.1 Attention Network Effects Detailed descriptive statistics and test results for all attention network effects are presented in Table 5 and Fig. 3 . Independent sample t-test analysis revealed significant differences in alerting effects between the high and the low companionship group, t (104) = 2.079, p = .04 < .05, d = .408, indicating better alerting function in the low companionship group than in the high companionship group. This group difference remained significant after controlling for age and gender, F (3,102) = 3.404, p = .021<.05, η 2 = .091. To further examine this group difference, a 2 (group) × 2 (cue: no cue vs. center cue) mixed ANOVA was conducted. The Shapiro-Wilk test indicated that the data in each group were normally distributed. However, the Mauchly’s test of sphericity showed that the assumption of sphericity was violated (Mauchly W = 1.000, p < .001). Therefore, the results from the univariate ANOVA with Greenhouse-Geisser correction were adopted. Results showed that the main effect of condition was significant, F = 7.028, p < .001, η p ² = .064. The main effect of group was insignificant, F = .065, p = . 799, η p ² = .001 and the interaction between condition and group was marginally significant, F = 2.955, p = .089, η p ² = .028. Due to the marginal significance of the interaction, simple effect tests and post-hoc tests were conducted. The results showed that in the no-cue condition, the simple effect of group was insignificant, F = .001, p = .982, η p ² = .000. In the central cue condition, the simple effect of group was also insignificant, F = .241, p = .625, η p ² = .002. And in high companionship group, the simple effect of condition was significant, F = 480.055, p < 0.001, η p ² = .825; In low companionship group, the simple effect of condition was also significant, F = 593.983, p < .001, η p ² = .853. Subsequent multiple comparisons revealed that, regardless of whether it was the high companionship group or the low companionship group, the no-cue condition was significantly higher than the central cue condition ( p < .001) indicating that the no-cue had a greater arousal effect on children in the high and low companionship group. The orienting network effects showed a significant group difference, t (104)= -2.020, p = .046 < .05, d = − .396, indicating better the orienting effect in the high companionship group than in the low companionship group. This group difference was insignificant after controlling for age and gender, F (3,102) = 1.873, p = .139, η p ² = .052. To further examine the group difference, a 2 (group) × 2 (cue: double vs. spatial cue) mixed ANOVA was conducted. The Shapiro-Wilk test indicated that the data in each group were normally distributed. However, the Mauchly’s test of sphericity showed that the assumption of sphericity was violated (Mauchly W = 1.000, p < .001). Therefore, the results from the univariate ANOVA with Greenhouse-Geisser correction were adopted. Results showed that the main effects of condition and group were not significant, but the interaction between condition and group was marginally significant, F = 2.861, p = .094, η p ² = .027. Due to the marginal significance of the interaction, simple effect tests and post-hoc tests were conducted. The results showed that in the double-cue condition, the simple effect of group was not significant, F = .726, p = .396, η p ² = .007; in the spatial cue condition, the simple effect of group was also not significant, F = .120, p = .729, η p ² = .001. In the high companionship group, the simple effect of condition was significant, F = 44.191, p < .001, η p ² = .302; In the low companionship group, the simple effect of condition was also significant, F = 17.854, p < .001, η p ² = .149. Subsequent multiple comparisons revealed that, in both the high and low companionship groups, the double-cue condition was significantly higher than the spatial cue condition ( p < .001) indicating that the double-cue had a greater arousal effect on children in the high and low companionship group. No significant difference was found in executive control effects between the groups, t (104) = .179, p = .859 > .05, d = .035. This group difference remained insignificant after controlling for age and gender, F (3,102) = 2.159, p = .097, η p ² = .06. Table 5 Attention Network Effects in Reaction Times (ms) for Low and High Companionship Groups. Low companionship High companionship M SD M SD t df p d Alerting RT 78.99 24.63 69.51 22.25 2.08 104 < .05 .41 Orienting RT 13.29 26.18 22.57 20.82 -2.02 104 < .05 − .40 Executive control 51.37 21.91 50.65 19.42 .179 104 > .05 .035 3.2.2 Attention Scale and Academic Performance Independent samples t-tests showed that the low companionship group scored significantly lower on the Attention Scale compared to the high companionship group, t (104) = 3.696, p < .001, d = .718). This group difference remained significant after controlling for age and gender, F (1,102) = 7.214, p < .001, η p 2 = .175. Similarly, the low companionship group demonstrated significantly lower academic performance compared to the high companionship group, t (104) = 2.835, p = .006 < .001, d = .551. This group difference remained significant after controlling for age and gender, F (1,102) = 4.874, p = .003 <.01, η p 2 = .125. Detailed results are presented in Table 6 . Table 6 Attention and Academic Performance of Low and High Companionship Groups. Low companionship High companionship M SD M SD t df p d Attention 14.92 2.85 16.87 2.56 3.696 104 < .001 .718 Academic Performance -0.55 3.11 0.78 1.39 2.835 104 .006 .551 3.3 Discussion Study 2 demonstrates that effective parental companionship has a positive effect on children’s cognitive development. While no group differences emerged in orienting and executive control networks, the low companionship group showed stronger alerting effects, thus supporting Hypothesis 3. The mixed ANOVA revealed that both groups showed significantly greater arousal effects in no-cue versus central cue conditions, suggesting that the alertness advantage of children in the low companionship group may come at the cost of diminished selective attention. This interpretation is supported by the observed group differences in attention regulation and academic performance. Despite having higher alertness, the low companionship group significantly lagged behind in both attentional regulatory capacity and academic achievement. The low companionship group’s heightened alertness paired with academic deficits suggests their vigilance reflects hyper-responsiveness to nonspecific stimuli rather than adaptive control. This pattern extends Study 1’s findings: parental companionship not only significantly predicts overall attention capacity but may also influence learning efficiency by shaping distinct developmental pathways of attention networks. Specifically, children in the low companionship group may develop an automated vigilance to nonspecific environmental cues, yet this compensatory mechanism fails to translate into effective learning adaptability. Growing up in an environment characterized by uncertainty may enhance bottom-up, stimulus-driven attention while weakening top-down, goal-oriented control. 4 General discussion Study 1 identified significant effects of parental companionship on children’s attention as measured by questionnaires: positive dimensions (such as communication and interaction, accompanying) significantly positively affected children’s attention, while negative dimensions (such as interference) significantly negatively impacted it. These findings align with prior research indicating that parental involvement may have a significant positive effect on students’ cognitive abilities, whereas negative parenting behaviors and attitudes may have a negative influence on children’s attention (Yang, Qian, & Xia, 2024; Barnow et al., 2004; Ellis & Nigg, 2009; Rogers et al., 2009; Keown, 2012; Breaux & Harvey, 2019; Demmer et al., 2018). During children’s growth process, a lack of parental companionship may lead to reduced behavioral norms and supervision for children, subsequently increasing unstructured behaviors such as playing with mobile phones, watching TV, daydreaming, etc., which affect the development of children’s attention. Additionally, children tend to imitate their parents’ behaviors. If parents appear absent-minded when accompanying their children or excessively interfere when children are exploring independently, children may perceive this inconsistency, potentially developing habits of distraction. Furthermore, attention partially mediated the relationship between communication and interaction and children’s academic performance, and fully mediated the relationship between accompanying partners, distractions, and children’s academic performance, suggesting that communication and interaction, accompanying partners, and distractions may affect children’s academic performance by influencing their attention. From the perspectives of heredity and environment, the family and school environments are crucial for the development of children’s basic cognitive abilities. A good family is important for the development of children’s cognitive abilities, and parenting styles, level of involvement, and economic status can positively influence children’s attention (Greenberg et al., 2003). Meanwhile, the learning activities children engage in all depend on the development of attention, which is a fundamental cognitive ability for children to perform well. Children with focused attention can engage in more specialized academic learning for extended periods; they can also concentrate when taking academic tests. On the other hand, children with attention disorders are more prone to emotional issues, such as irritability and low mood, which significantly impair the acquisition of academic skills (Mackenbach et al., 2008). In this study, no significant negative predictive effect of neglect on academic performance was found. This may be because neglect is multidimensional but Study 1 mainly investigated emotional neglect, rather than educational neglect, and supervisory neglect etc. Different types of neglect may have different impacts on children. Emotional neglect primarily affects children’s internalizing problems and emotional abilities (Zhang et al., 2024). Additionally, in some cases, other support systems for children (such as schools and peers) may compensate for parental emotional neglect, especially for children in the stage of intimate friendship sharing (Selman, 1980). From the perspective of developmental psychology, children at this stage spend more time interacting with peers, and the mutual influence among peers is constantly increasing. Friendship is an important source of their security or social support, and they often change their behavior by observing the behavior patterns of peer role models. In summary, the results reveal that the impact of parental neglect on academic performance is complex and has multiple causes. Further investigations into the effects of different dimensions of neglect on children’s attention and academic performance can be conducted in the future. Study 2 further validated the impact of parental companionship on attention through experiments, finding that effective parental companionship promoted children’s cognitive development. The results showed no differences in orienting network effects or executive control network effects between the high and low companionship groups; however, differences were observed in alerting network effects, with the alerting network effect value being higher in the low-companionship group. That is, the central cue has a greater arousal effect on the low-companionship group. The functions of the alerting network include the ability to maintain attention (phasic alertness) and the ability to prepare for responses to external stimuli (tonic alertness) (Pozuelos et al., 2014). The higher alerting network effect value in the low companionship group may indicate a stronger ability to maintain attention, i.e., the persistence of attention, manifesting as prolonged investment in learning objects, which is beneficial for learning. However, this conflicts with previous research (Yu & Smith, 2016). The higher alerting network effect value may also suggest that the low companionship group has a stronger readiness to respond to external stimuli, making their attention more susceptible to external irrelevant stimuli, thereby reducing classroom listening quality or learning efficiency and affecting children’s academic performance. Since the results of Study 2 indicate that the academic performance of children in the high-companionship group was significantly better than that of children in the low-companionship group, so the higher alerting network effect value in the low-companionship group was more likely due to tonic alertness, i.e., a stronger readiness to respond to external stimuli. Given the significant impact of parental companionship on children’s attention and academic performance, this study suggests that efforts should be made by parents to improve the quality of parental companionship, thereby enhancing children’s attention and academic performance. Only when parents become aware of the importance of education and the significance of their own behaviors and attitudes for their children’s growth can they better create a good family environment, contributing to the improvement and development of their children’s attention and helping them succeed. Therefore, this study provides the following suggestions concerning parental companionship: in daily life, parents should actively engage in deep and sufficient communication and interaction with their children in terms of learning, emotions, and other aspects, and provide a warm companionship environment for them. The results indicate that mere accompanying can be beneficial; for instance, when children are reading, parents can quietly accompany them without spending excessive time on electronic devices. This study offers some ideas for future research but also has certain limitations. Firstly, Study 1 mainly used questionnaires completed by students, and their understanding and reports of parental companionship may deviate from reality. If other methods such as interviews were also used, more evidence could support our findings. Secondly, the underlying reasons for the higher alerting effect in the low-companionship group compared to the high-companionship group, as observed in Study 2, need further exploration. Although the orienting effect was not significant between the high and low groups, it had already reached marginal significance. The sample size of Study 2 could be increased in the future for further testing. Furthermore, the behavioral experiment did not explore the differences in the interaction between the three attention networks among children with different levels of parental companionship. For example, separating alerting and orienting cues might result in a larger orienting effect when an alerting cue is present, as it causes higher levels of attentional readiness among participants; there may also be an inhibitory relationship between the alerting and executive attention networks, where an alerting cue leads to greater flanker interference (Pozuelos et al., 2014). Future studies could separate the cues of the three networks to better understand the impacts of parental companionship on attention. 5 Conclusion This research provides new evidence for the relationships among parental companionship, children’s attention and academic performance. It found that the positive dimensions of parental companionship, such as communication and interaction, accompanying, significantly positively predicted children’s attention and academic performance, while the negative dimension of interference significantly negatively predicted them. Further mediation effect analysis showed that attention played a fully mediating role between accompanying, interference, and academic performance, and a partially mediating role between communication and interaction and academic performance. Additionally, this study explored the impact of parental companionship on children’s attention network effects, finding that the alerting network effect value was significantly higher in the low-companionship group than in the high-companionship group, indicating that the central cue had a greater arousal effect on low-companionship children. Although there were no significant differences in orienting network and executive network effects between the high and low companionship groups, the difference in orienting network effects had already reached a marginal significance level. Future studies need to further focus on the potential impact of parental companionship on children’s attention network effects. Declarations Funding This work was supported by the Philosophy and Social Science Fund of the 13th Five-year Plan of Guangdong Province of China (grant numbers: GD20CXL03). Conflict of interest We declare no conflict of interest. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Ethical Approval The study was approved by the South China Normal University (NO.SCNU-PSY-2024-268). All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution and/or national research committee. Parent-informed consent and child assent were obtained from all participants. Author Contribution X.H. , L.D. and C.C. designed the experiments; L.D. , C.C. and X.H. collected the data; X.H. , L.D. ,T.W. and C.C. analyzed the data. X.H. , L.D. , C.C. and T.W. discussed the results and contributed to the writing of the paper. All authors approved the submitted version. Acknowledgments We thank Xiaoxiao Cai for the collection of data. Data Availability Data and materials will be available on request. References Alavi, M., Seng, J. H., Mustaffa, M. S., Ninggal, M. T., Amini, M., & Latif, A. A. (2019). Attention, impulsiveness, and gender in academic achievement among typically developing children. Perceptual and Motor Skills , 126 (1), 5-24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031512518809163 Barnow, S., Lucht, M., Hamm, A., John, U., & Freyberger, H. J. (2004). The relation of a family history of alcoholism, obstetric complications and family environment to behavioral problems among 154 adolescents in Germany: Results from the children of alcoholics study in Pomerania. European Addiction Research, 10 (1), 8-14. https://doi.org/10.1159/000073721 Behrman, J. R., Schott, W., Mani, S., Crookston, B. T., Dearden, K., Le Thuc, D., . . . Stein, A. D. (2017). Intergenerational transmission of poverty and inequality: Parental resources and schooling attainment and children’s human capital in Ethiopia, India, Peru, and Vietnam. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 65 (4), 657-697. https://doi.org/10.1086/691971 Benner, A. D., Boyle, A. E., & Sadler, S. (2016). Parental involvement and adolescents’ educational success: The roles of prior achievement and socioeconomic status. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45 (6), 1053-1064. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0431-4 Breaux, R. P., & Harvey, E. A. (2019). A longitudinal study of the relation between family functioning and preschool ADHD symptoms. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 48 (5), 749-764. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2018.1437737 Cheng, X., & Zhou, S. (2023). The influence mechanism of parental emotional companionship on children’s second language acquisition. Frontiers in Psychology, 13 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1034867 Claussen, A. H., Holbrook, J. R., Hutchins, H. J., Robinson, L. R., Bloomfield, J., Meng, L., ... Kaminski, J. W. (2024). All in the family? A systematic review and meta-analysis of parenting and family environment as risk factors for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in Children. Prevention Science, 25 (2), 249-271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-022-01358-4 Datu, J. A. D., & Buenconsejo, J. U. (2021). Academic engagement and achievement predict career adaptability. Career Development Quarterly, 69 (1), 34-48. https://doi.org/10.1002/cdq.12247 Deault, L. C. (2010). A systematic review of parenting in relation to the development of comorbidities and functional impairments in children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 41 (2), 168-192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-009-0159-4 Demmer, D. H., Puccio, F., Stokes, M. A., McGillivray, J. A., & Hooley, M. (2018). The influence of child gender on the prospective relationships between parenting and child ADHD. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 46 (1), 113-125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-017-0284-7 Duckworth, A. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Self-discipline outdoes IQ in predicting academic performance of adolescents. Psychological Science, 16 (12), 939-944. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01641.x Ellis, B., & Nigg, J. (2009). Parenting practices and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: New findings suggest partial specificity of effects. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 48 (2), 146-154. https://doi.org/10.1097/chi.0b013e31819176d0 Epstein, J. L. (1990). School and family connections: theory, research, and implications for integrating sociologies of education and family. Marriage & Family Review, 15 (2), 99. https://doi.org/10.1300/j002v15n01_06 Fan, J., McCandliss, B. D., Fossella, J., Flombaum, J. I., & Posner, M. I. (2005). The activation of attentional networks. Neuroimage, 26 (2), 471-479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.02.004 Fan, J., McCandliss, B. D., Sommer, T., Raz, A., & Posner, M. I. (2002). Testing the efficiency and independence of attentional networks. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14 (3), 340-347. https://doi.org/10.1162/089892902317361886 Flores, J., Caqueo-Urizar, A., Lopez, V., & Acevedo, D. (2022). Symptomatology of attention deficit, hyperactivity and defiant behavior as predictors of academic achievement. Bmc Psychiatry, 22 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-022-03714-8 Greenberg, M. T., Weissberg, R. P., O’Brien, M. U., Zins, J. E., Fredericks, L., Resnik, H., & Elias, M. J. (2003). Enhancing school-based prevention and youth development through coordinated social, emotional, and academic learning. American Psychologist, 58 (6-7), 466-474. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.58.6-7.466 Hawes, D. J., Dadds, M. R., Frost, A. D. J., & Russell, A. (2013). Parenting practices and prospective levels of hyperactivity/inattention across early- and middle-childhood. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 35 (3), 273-282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-013-9341-x Haynes, N. M., Comer, J. P., & Hamilton-Lee, M. (1989). School climate enhancement through parental involvement. J ournal of School Psychology , 27(1), 87–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-4405(89)90034-4 Jensen, A. C., Whiteman, S. D., Bernard, J. M., & McHale, S. M. (2017). Family resource allocation after firstborns leave home: implications for secondborns’ academic functioning. Family Process, 56 (3), 766-780. https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12203 Johnson, K. A., Robertson, I. H., Barry, E., Mulligan, A., Daibhis, A., Daly, M., . . . Bellgrove, M. A. (2008). Impaired conflict resolution and alerting in children with ADHD: evidence from the Attention Network Task (ANT). Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49 (12), 1339-1347. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.01936.x Keown, L. J. (2012). Predictors of Boys’ ADHD Symptoms from early to middle childhood: The role of father-child and mother-child interactions. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 40 (4), 569-581. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-011-9586-3 Kratz, O., Studer, P., Malcherek, S., Erbe, K., Moll, G. H., & Heinrich, H. (2011). Attentional processes in children with ADHD: An event-related potential study using the attention network test. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 81 (2), 82-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2011.05.008 Li, J., Li, Z., Lei, X., Yang, J., Yu, X., & Liu, H. (2022). Longitudinal association between child psychological abuse and neglect and academic achievement in Chinese primary school children: a moderated mediation model. Frontiers in Psychology . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.870371 Mackenbach, J. P., Stirbu, I., Roskam, A.-J. R., Schaap, M. M., Menvielle, G., Leinsalu, M., . . . European Union Working Group, S. (2008). Socioeconomic inequalities in health in 22 European countries. New England Journal of Medicine, 358 (23), 2468-2481. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmsa0707519 Mullane, J. C., Corkum, P. V., Klein, R. M., McLaughlin, E. N., & Lawrence, M. A. (2011). Alerting, orienting, and executive attention in children with ADHD. Journal of Attention Disorders, 15 (4), 310-320. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054710366384 Nosek & Banaji. (2001). The Go/No-go Association Task. Social Cognition ,19(6), 625-664. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.19.6.625.20886 Palacios, D., Dijkstra, J. K., Villalobos, C., Treviño, E., Berger, C., Huisman, M., & Veenstra, R. (2019). Classroom ability composition and the role of academic performance and school misconduct in the formation of academic and friendship networks. Journal of School Psychology, 74 , 58-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2019.05.006 Posner, M. I., & Petersen, S. E. (1990). The attention system of the human brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 13 , 25-42. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ne.13.030190.000325 Pozuelos, J. P., Paz-Alonso, P. M., Castillo, A., Fuentes, L. J., & Rosario Rueda, M. (2014). Development of attention networks and their interactions in childhood. Developmental Psychology, 50 (10), 2405-2415. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037469 Qing Shui, X.(1999). How to improve children's attention. China: Foreign Languages Press. Roeser, R. W., Eccles, J. S., & Strobel, K. R. (1998). Linking the study of schooling and mental health: Selected issues and empirical illustrations at the level of the individual. Educational Psychologist, 33 (4), 153-176. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3304_2 Rogers, M. A., Wiener, J., Marton, I., & Tannock, R. (2009). Parental involvement in children’s learning: Comparing parents of children with and without Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Journal of School Psychology, 47 (3), 167-185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2009.02.001 Selman,R.L.(1980). The growth of interpersonal understanding: Developmental and clinical analyses . Shelleby, E. C., & Ogg, J. (2020). Longitudinal relationships between parent involvement, parental warmth, ADHD symptoms, and reading achievement. Journal of Attention Disorders, 24 (5), 737-749. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054719859075 Vittadini, G., Sturaro, C., & Folloni, G. (2022). Non-Cognitive Skills and Cognitive Skills to measure school efficiency. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences , 81, 101058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2021.101058 Wang, M.-T., Hill, N. E., & Hofkens, T. (2014). Parental involvement and African American and European American adolescents’ academic, behavioral, and emotional development in secondary school. Child Development, 85 (6), 2151-2168. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12284 Wen, Z., Hau, K-T., & Marsh, H.W. (2004). Structural equation model testing: Cutoff criteria for goodness of fit indices and chi-square test. Acta Psychologica Sinica , 36 (2), 186-194. Wu, Z., Yu, J., & Xu, C. (2023). Does screen exposure necessarily relate to behavior problems? The buffering roles of emotion regulation and caregiver companionship. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 63 , 424-433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2023.01.008 Xuan, B., Mackie, M.-A., Spagna, A., Wu, T., Tian, Y., Hof, P.R., Fan, J.,(2016). The activation of interactive attentional networks. NeuroImage ,129, 308-319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.01.017 Yang, F., Qian, Y., & Xia, Z. (2024). Cognitive ability and locus of control: the effect of parental involvement on the academic performance of elementary and secondary school students. Current Psychology, 43 (3), 2816-2831. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04572-7 Yu, C., & Smith, Linda B. (2016). The Social Origins of Sustained Attention in One-Year-Old Human Infants. Current Biology, 26 (9), 1235-1240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2016.03.026 Zhang, Z., Fu, L., Jing, W., & Liao, Z. (2023). Childhood parental companionship, self-esteem and prosocial behavior in college students: A correlation analysis. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 43 , 87-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnu.2023.01.002 Zhang, Y., Xu, W., McDonnell, D., & Wang, J. L. (2024). The relationship between childhood maltreatment subtypes and adolescent internalizing problems: The mediating role of maladaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies. Child Abuse & Neglect , 152, Article 106796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2024.106796 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 11 Jun, 2025 Reviews received at journal 10 Jun, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 25 Apr, 2025 Reviewers invited by journal 24 Apr, 2025 Editor assigned by journal 12 Apr, 2025 Submission checks completed at journal 28 Mar, 2025 First submitted to journal 28 Mar, 2025 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {\"props\":{\"pageProps\":{\"initialData\":{\"identity\":\"rs-6324909\",\"acceptedTermsAndConditions\":true,\"allowDirectSubmit\":false,\"archivedVersions\":[],\"articleType\":\"Research Article\",\"associatedPublications\":[],\"authors\":[{\"id\":448463016,\"identity\":\"0c68b6b1-0465-47a7-956a-83ed4c347c84\",\"order_by\":0,\"name\":\"Xuanxiao Huo\",\"email\":\"\",\"orcid\":\"\",\"institution\":\"South China Normal University\",\"correspondingAuthor\":false,\"prefix\":\"\",\"firstName\":\"Xuanxiao\",\"middleName\":\"\",\"lastName\":\"Huo\",\"suffix\":\"\"},{\"id\":448463018,\"identity\":\"ed6e3fde-f828-4bb3-8d7d-af8b434214d9\",\"order_by\":1,\"name\":\"Liuyi Du\",\"email\":\"\",\"orcid\":\"\",\"institution\":\"South China Normal University\",\"correspondingAuthor\":false,\"prefix\":\"\",\"firstName\":\"Liuyi\",\"middleName\":\"\",\"lastName\":\"Du\",\"suffix\":\"\"},{\"id\":448463019,\"identity\":\"a26bb7ba-d1de-433b-8ade-2e5af81695fd\",\"order_by\":2,\"name\":\"Tingting Wu\",\"email\":\"\",\"orcid\":\"\",\"institution\":\"Capital Normal University\",\"correspondingAuthor\":false,\"prefix\":\"\",\"firstName\":\"Tingting\",\"middleName\":\"\",\"lastName\":\"Wu\",\"suffix\":\"\"},{\"id\":448463020,\"identity\":\"3893f864-b50a-4ed2-9168-a756c96450a0\",\"order_by\":3,\"name\":\"Caiqi Chen\",\"email\":\"\",\"orcid\":\"\",\"institution\":\"South China Normal University\",\"correspondingAuthor\":true,\"prefix\":\"\",\"firstName\":\"Caiqi\",\"middleName\":\"\",\"lastName\":\"Chen\",\"suffix\":\"\"}],\"badges\":[],\"createdAt\":\"2025-03-28 05:08:10\",\"currentVersionCode\":1,\"declarations\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6324909/v1\",\"doiUrl\":\"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6324909/v1\",\"draftVersion\":[],\"editorialEvents\":[],\"editorialNote\":\"\",\"failedWorkflow\":false,\"files\":[{\"id\":82123395,\"identity\":\"c604fedc-2d5a-46c5-bf5c-25c7c16bf652\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-05-07 03:32:29\",\"extension\":\"png\",\"order_by\":1,\"title\":\"Figure 1\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"figure\",\"size\":70798,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cstrong\\u003eMediating Effect Diagram\\u003c/strong\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"floatimage1.png\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6324909/v1/4a2e85d0c41cbbee441a20fb.png\"},{\"id\":82123394,\"identity\":\"211444e1-6578-46b3-a686-d13940da4b63\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-05-07 03:32:29\",\"extension\":\"png\",\"order_by\":2,\"title\":\"Figure 2\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"figure\",\"size\":40080,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cstrong\\u003eFlowchart of the ANT paradigm\\u003c/strong\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"floatimage2.png\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6324909/v1/bededed517a83a2d486a29a4.png\"},{\"id\":82123401,\"identity\":\"20266816-620b-4636-9c0f-11db9797ca2c\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-05-07 03:32:29\",\"extension\":\"png\",\"order_by\":3,\"title\":\"Figure 3\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"figure\",\"size\":11539,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cstrong\\u003eAverage Attention Network Effects for Low and High Companionship Groups\\u003c/strong\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eNote: The error bars in the figure represent the mean ±1 standard deviation , demonstrating the dispersion of the data set.\\u003c/p\\u003e\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"floatimage3.png\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6324909/v1/003e48a9fdf53dac6409a54b.png\"},{\"id\":82125329,\"identity\":\"72751452-ae5c-4cc6-af6a-abfc5ba3cbf4\",\"added_by\":\"auto\",\"created_at\":\"2025-05-07 03:48:29\",\"extension\":\"pdf\",\"order_by\":0,\"title\":\"\",\"display\":\"\",\"copyAsset\":false,\"role\":\"manuscript-pdf\",\"size\":1289650,\"visible\":true,\"origin\":\"\",\"legend\":\"\",\"description\":\"\",\"filename\":\"manuscript.pdf\",\"url\":\"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6324909/v1/55f7c8c8-1390-4aa0-95d1-dfe8dc8e867e.pdf\"}],\"financialInterests\":\"No competing interests reported.\",\"formattedTitle\":\"Parental Companionship Shapes Children's Attentional Functions and Academic Achievement\",\"fulltext\":[{\"header\":\"1 Introduction\",\"content\":\"\\u003cp\\u003eParental companionship, as a critical dimension of parenting styles and family involvement, encompasses parents' engagement in home-based parent-child activities that provide children with emotional and instrumental support (Epstein, 1990; Zhang, Fu, Jing, \\u0026amp; Liao, 2023). Research suggests that parental companionship influences children's development through both cognitive and non-cognitive pathways (Cheng \\u0026amp; Zhou, 2023; Wu, Yu, \\u0026amp; Xu, 2023; Zhang et al., 2023). The cognitive pathway involves the development of fundamental mental processes such as attention, memory, and problem-solving abilities, while the non-cognitive pathway encompasses psychological attributes such as self-discipline, learning confidence, and locus of control (Vittadini, 2022). Existing research has predominantly examined non-cognitive mechanisms, demonstrating how parent-child interactions enhance academic outcomes through the development of learning confidence and internal locus of control (Cheng \\u0026amp; Zhou, 2023; Duckworth \\u0026amp; Seligman, 2005; Yang, Qian, \\u0026amp; Xia, 2024). However, cognitive pathways through which parental companionship shapes children's development has received relatively little attention, despite their fundamental importance in children's developmental trajectories.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eThe need to understand cognitive pathways becomes particularly compelling in the context of academic achievement, where cognitive abilities serve as fundamental building blocks for learning. Over the past decade, extensive research has documented that parental companionship plays a crucial role in children's academic development and has long-term impacts on future achievements (Behrman et al., 2017; Benner, Boyle, \\u0026amp; Sadler, 2016; Datu \\u0026amp; Buenconsejo, 2021; Palacios et al., 2019; Roeser, Eccles, \\u0026amp; Strobel, 1998). Specifically, studies have shown that time investment of in parent-child interactions can positively affect children's academic performance (Duckworth \\u0026amp; Seligman, 2005). This influence manifests through multiple channels: parental companionship enhances students' academic engagement through improved attendance, and learning orientation/learning (Haynes, 1989), strengths behavioral and emotional engagement involvement in learning activities (Wang, Hill, \\u0026amp; Hofkens, 2014), and notably, can counteract the typical decline in learning interest during adolescence (Jensen, Whiteman, Bernard, \\u0026amp; McHale, 2017). Given that cognitive processes are essential for academic learning activities, from understanding new concepts to solving complex problems, examining how parental companionship might enhance children's cognitive abilities represents a promising direction for understanding its benefits on academic achievement. A deeper understanding of these cognitive pathways could not only advance theoretical knowledge but also help parents develop more targeted strategies to support their children's academic development through quality companionship.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eAmong various cognitive pathways, attention emerges as a particularly promising mediating mechanism linking parental companionship to academic achievement. A substantial body of research has demonstrated that parental companionship significantly influences children's attention development. Studies have shown that positive parental behaviors and attitudes enhance children's attention, while negative parenting behaviors such as parental rejection are associated with attention problems (Barnow et al., 2004) and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) (Breaux \\u0026amp; Harvey, 2019; Claussen et al., 2024; Demmer, Puccio, Stokes, McGillivray, \\u0026amp; Hooley, 2018; Ellis \\u0026amp; Nigg, 2009; Keown, 2012; Rogers, Wiener, Marton, \\u0026amp; Tannock, 2009). High levels of parental involvement and warmth can mitigate ADHD-related impairments (Deault, 2010), predict fewer attention problems in later development (Shelleby \\u0026amp; Ogg, 2020), reducing inattention during infancy (Hawes, Dadds, Frost, \\u0026amp; Russell, 2013), and extend children's attention spans (Yu \\u0026amp; Smith, 2016). Meanwhile, attention has been consistently identified as a crucial factor in academic success, with numerous studies documenting its significant positive impact on children's academic performance (\\u003cspan type=\\\"Underline\\\" class=\\\"Underline\\\" name=\\\"Emphasis\\\"\\u003eAlavi et al., 2019\\u003c/span\\u003e; Flores, Caqueo-Urizar, Lopez, \\u0026amp; Acevedo, 2022). Recent research has revealed that cognitive abilities mediate the relationship between parental involvement and students' academic performance (Yang, Qian, \\u0026amp; Xia, 2024). Despite these separate lines of evidence suggesting that parental companionship may enhance academic achievement through improved attention, few studies have directly examined attention as a mediating mechanism in this relationship, representing a critical gap in our understanding of how parental companionship benefits children's academic development.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eUnderstanding how parental companionship influences attention and subsequently affects academic performance requires a deeper examination of attention's underlying mechanisms. Attention is not a unitary construct but rather a complex cognitive process comprising multiple components. The attentional network theory, developed from cognitive neuroscience research by Posner and Petersen (1990), has provided a sophisticated framework that delineates three distinct attentional networks: alerting (maintenance of vigilance), orienting (selection and orientation of sensory information), and executive control of attention (resolution of cognitive interference). The Fan et al. (2002) developed the Attentional Network Test (ANT) to measure the processing efficiency of these three networks, and through fMRI studies (Fan et al.,2005; Xuan et al.,2016), they confirmed that these attentional functions indeed activate distinct neural networks. This objective cognitive task has been widely employed to study attentional network functions in various research contexts, with numerous studies applying it to examine attentional networks in children and adolescents, both typically developing youth and those with attention difficulties (Johnson et al., 2008; Kratz et al., 2011; Mullane, Corkum, Klein, McLaughlin, \\u0026amp; Lawrence, 2011), providing a valuable tool for examining how environmental factors such as parental companionship might differentially affect specific components of attention.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eThe present research employed a two-study approach to address these critical gaps in our understanding of how linking parental companionship to academic achievement. In Study 1, we conducted a large-scale investigation with elementary school students to examine attention as a potential mediating mechanism, addressing the noted absence of research directly testing the attention-mediated pathway between parental companionship and academic achievement. Building upon these findings, Study 2 adopted a more fine-grained analysis using the ANT paradigm to explore how parental companionship might differentially influence the three fundamental attention networks, thereby providing a deeper understanding of the specific attentional processes affected by parent-child interactions. Based on the documented relationships between parental companionship and attention development, we anticipated that higher levels of parental companionship would be associated with enhanced attention capabilities and academic achievement in children. Furthermore, given the established importance of attention in academic learning, we expected attention to mediate the relationship between parental companionship and academic achievement. Given the distinct nature and neural bases of the three attention networks, we also hypothesized that children experiencing different levels of parental companionship would show varying patterns of performance across the alerting, orienting, and executive control networks.\\u003c/p\\u003e \"},{\"header\":\"2 Study 1: Examining the Mediating Role of Attention in the Relationship Between Parental Companionship and Academic Performance\",\"content\":\"\\u003ch2\\u003e2.1 Methods\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003e2.1.1 Participants\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eUsing the convenience sampling methods, participants were fifth and sixth-grade students recruited from public elementary schools in Guangzhou, China. In this study, data were collected using offline electronic questionnaires. Of the 1,000 questionnaires distributed, 936 were returned, in which 871 were valid (effective rate of 93.06%). The final sample comprised 451 males (51.78%) and 420 females (48.22%).\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThe study’s purpose was explained to the participants, and therefore confidentiality and voluntary participation were assured. All participants provided written informed consents. Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the School of Psychology, South China Normal University.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003e2.1.2 Measurements\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e \\u003cb\\u003eParental Companionship.\\u003c/b\\u003e Children reported their perceived parental companionship using a 21-items scale. The scale measures four dimensions: two positive dimensions [communication and interaction (10 items) and accompanying (4 items)], and two negative dimensions [neglect (4 items) and interference (3 items)]. Items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = never to 5 = always), with 14 items scored in a positive direction and 7 items reverse-scored (see Table\\u0026nbsp;\\u003cspan refid=\\\"Tab1\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e1\\u003c/span\\u003e). Higher total score indicates greater perceived parental companionship. The scale demonstrated good internal consistency, with a Cronbach's α of .884 for the total scale and .892, .740, .733, and .757 for the communication and interaction, accompanying, neglect, and interference subscales, respectively.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cdiv class=\\\"gridtable\\\"\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\" colnum=\\\"1\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\" colnum=\\\"2\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003ctable float=\\\"Yes\\\" id=\\\"Tab1\\\" border=\\\"1\\\"\\u003e\\u003ccaption language=\\\"En\\\"\\u003e \\u003cdiv class=\\\"CaptionNumber\\\"\\u003eTable 1\\u003c/div\\u003e \\u003cdiv class=\\\"CaptionContent\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eScale Items.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/div\\u003e \\u003c/caption\\u003e\\u003ccolgroup cols=\\\"2\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/colgroup\\u003e\\u003cthead\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eDimension\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eItems\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003c/thead\\u003e\\u003ctbody\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\" morerows=\\\"9\\\" rowspan=\\\"10\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003ecommunication and interaction\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e1. When your father or mother eats with you, you both focus on eating, but also interact with each other at the same time. (For example, discussing the favorite dishes.)\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e2. Your father or mother asks about your activities at school.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e3. Your father or mother inquires about your recent academic progress.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e4. Your father or mother takes you to social activities such as visiting relatives and friends.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e5. When you achieve good grades, your father or mother praises you.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e6. Your father or mother employs various methods to cultivate your initiative and enthusiasm for learning.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e7. When you encounter troubles or feel upset, your father or mother comforts and encourages you.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e8. When you achieve success in what you do, your father or mother expresses congratulations and pride to you.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e9. Your father or mother makes you feel their affection for you through their words, expressions, and actions.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e10. Your father or mother will share happiness and sorrow with you.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\" morerows=\\\"3\\\" rowspan=\\\"4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eaccompanying\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e1. When you read, your father or mother reads with you. (Both of you read the same book interactively.)\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e2. When you read, your father or mother accompanies you while you read. (Both of you read your own books.)\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e3. When you play games, your father or mother plays with you. (Both of you engage in the same activity interactively.)\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e4. When you play games, your father or mother stays with you while you play. (However, each of you plays your own game, for example, you build with your LEGO, and he/she assembles his/her LEGO.)\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\" morerows=\\\"3\\\" rowspan=\\\"4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eneglect\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e1. When you are reading, your father or mother suddenly remembers something they want you to do, and they will ask you to stop reading to take care of it.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e2. When your father or mother eats with you, he/she will watch TV/play with a mobile phone or iPad.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e3. When you play games, your father or mother will watch TV/play with a mobile phone or iPad.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e4. When you talk to your father or mother, he/she will listen to you while also watching TV or playing with a mobile phone or iPad.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\" morerows=\\\"2\\\" rowspan=\\\"3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003einterference\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e1. When you play games, your father or mother will nag or scold you. (For example, they might yell at you for being too loud, or for being barefoot, etc.)\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e2. When you play games, your father or mother will suddenly interrupt your game and ask you to go read a book or do your homework.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e3. When you play games, your father or mother will suddenly interrupt your game and ask you to do housework.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003c/tbody\\u003e\\u003c/table\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e \\u003cb\\u003eAttention(Qing, 1999).\\u003c/b\\u003e The scale consists of 10 items rated on a 3-point scale (0 = never able to do it, 1 = sometimes able to do it, 2 = always able to do it). Example items include: “You can read storybooks or comics continuously, and you can watch cartoons on TV in one sitting”, and “When playing games such as hide-and-seek, dodgeball, or tug-of-war, you are able to concentrate until the very end”. Total scores range from 0 to 20, with scores above 14 indicating good attention; between 11–13 indicating moderate attention; and scores below 10 indicating attention difficulties. The scale showed acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's α = .682).\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e \\u003cb\\u003eAcademic performance.\\u003c/b\\u003e Academic performance was assessed using standardized scores (z-scores) from the midterm examinations in three core subjects: Chinese, mathematics, and English. These subjects were selected as they represent the primary academic domains in Chinese elementary education and are consistently used as key indicators of academic achievement in the Chinese educational system (Li et al., 2022). A composite academic performance score was calculated by summing the z-scores of these three subjects. The use of standardized scores allows for meaningful comparisons across different subjects while controlling for potential variations in difficulty levels and scoring criteria between subjects.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eAll statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS 27.0 (RRID: SCR_001905).\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003e2.2 Results\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003e2.2.1 Correlation Analysis\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003ePearson correlation analyses were conducted to examine the relationship among study variables (see Table\\u0026nbsp;\\u003cspan refid=\\\"Tab2\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e2\\u003c/span\\u003e). The total parental companionship score was positively correlation between the total score of parental companionship and children's attention (\\u003cem\\u003er\\u003c/em\\u003e = .299, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001). Specifically, the positive dimensions of parental companionship showed significant positive correlations with attention (communication and interaction: \\u003cem\\u003er\\u003c/em\\u003e = .308, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001; accompanying: \\u003cem\\u003er\\u003c/em\\u003e = .277, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001) and academic performance (communication and interaction: \\u003cem\\u003er\\u003c/em\\u003e = .183, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001; accompanying: \\u003cem\\u003er\\u003c/em\\u003e = .106, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .01), while the negative dimensions of parental companionship showed significant negative correlations with attention (neglect: \\u003cem\\u003er\\u003c/em\\u003e = − .098, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001; interference: \\u003cem\\u003er\\u003c/em\\u003e = − .113, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001) and academic performance (interference: \\u003cem\\u003er\\u003c/em\\u003e = − .103, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .01) .\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eAdditionally, both parental companionship and attention demonstrated significant positive correlations with and overall academic performance (parental companionship: \\u003cem\\u003er\\u003c/em\\u003e = .166, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001; attention: \\u003cem\\u003er\\u003c/em\\u003e = .251, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001) .\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cdiv class=\\\"gridtable\\\"\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\" colnum=\\\"1\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"char\\\" char=\\\".\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\" colnum=\\\"2\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"char\\\" char=\\\".\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\" colnum=\\\"3\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\" colnum=\\\"4\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\" colnum=\\\"5\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\" colnum=\\\"6\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\" colnum=\\\"7\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\" colnum=\\\"8\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\" colnum=\\\"9\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003ctable float=\\\"Yes\\\" id=\\\"Tab2\\\" border=\\\"1\\\"\\u003e\\u003ccaption language=\\\"En\\\"\\u003e \\u003cdiv class=\\\"CaptionNumber\\\"\\u003eTable 2\\u003c/div\\u003e \\u003cdiv class=\\\"CaptionContent\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eDescriptive statistical analysis and correlation coefficient for parental companionship and attention.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/div\\u003e \\u003c/caption\\u003e\\u003ccolgroup cols=\\\"9\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/colgroup\\u003e\\u003cthead\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eM\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eSD\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e1\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e2\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e3\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e4\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e5\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e6\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003c/thead\\u003e\\u003ctbody\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e1. Parental Companionship\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"char\\\" char=\\\".\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e50.4\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"char\\\" char=\\\".\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e13.0\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e1\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e2. Communication and\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eInteraction\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"char\\\" char=\\\".\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e29.3\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"char\\\" char=\\\".\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e6.9\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.858\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e1\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e3. Accompanying\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"char\\\" char=\\\".\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e6.4\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"char\\\" char=\\\".\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e3.8\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.758\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.606\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e1\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e4. Neglect\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"char\\\" char=\\\".\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e9.6\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"char\\\" char=\\\".\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e3.7\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e− .659\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e− .324\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e− .319\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e1\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e5. Interference\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"char\\\" char=\\\".\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e6.1\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"char\\\" char=\\\".\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e3.2\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e− .566\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e− .241\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e− .225\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.457\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e1\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e6. Attention\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"char\\\" char=\\\".\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e15.8\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"char\\\" char=\\\".\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e2.6\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.299\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.308\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.277\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e− .098\\u003csup\\u003e**\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e− .113\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e1\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e7. Academic Performance\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"char\\\" char=\\\".\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e0.11\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"char\\\" char=\\\".\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e2.4\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.166\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.183\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.106\\u003csup\\u003e**\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e− .045\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e− .103\\u003csup\\u003e**\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.251\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003c/tbody\\u003e\\u003c/table\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003e2.2.2 Mediating Analyses\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eMediation analyses were conducted following the procedures outlined by Wen et al. (2004). In these analyses, each dimension of parental companionship (communication and interaction, accompanying, and interference) served as independent variables (X), academic performance as the dependent variable (Y), and attention as the mediator (M). Three regression models were tested for each dimension: Model 1 tested the total effect of X on Y, Model 2 examined the effect of X on M, and Model 3 tested both the direct effect of X on Y and the indirect effect through M while controlling for demographic variables. Demographic variables (including the gender of the child and that of the foster parent, whether the child is an only child, place of residence, parental education, and household economic status) were controlled in the following analyses. Results were summarized in Table\\u0026nbsp;\\u003cspan refid=\\\"Tab3\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e3\\u003c/span\\u003e and Fig.\\u0026nbsp;\\u003cspan refid=\\\"Fig1\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e1\\u003c/span\\u003e.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eFor the communication and interaction dimension (Fig.\\u0026nbsp;\\u003cspan refid=\\\"Fig1\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e1\\u003c/span\\u003ea), Model 1 showed a significant total effect on academic performance (\\u003cem\\u003eβ\\u003c/em\\u003e = .055, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001). In Model 2, communication and interaction significantly predicted attention (\\u003cem\\u003eβ\\u003c/em\\u003e = .111, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001). When testing the full mediation model (Model 3), both the direct effect of communication and interaction (\\u003cem\\u003eβ\\u003c/em\\u003e = .035, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .004) and the effect of attention (\\u003cem\\u003eβ\\u003c/em\\u003e = .182, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001) on academic performance remained significant, indicating partial mediation.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eRegarding accompanying (Fig.\\u0026nbsp;\\u003cspan refid=\\\"Fig1\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e1\\u003c/span\\u003eb), Model 1 revealed a significant total effect on academic performance (\\u003cem\\u003eβ\\u003c/em\\u003e = .056, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .010). Model 2 showed that accompanying significantly predicted attention (\\u003cem\\u003eβ\\u003c/em\\u003e = .185, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001). In Model 3, the direct effect of accompanying became non-significant (\\u003cem\\u003eβ\\u003c/em\\u003e = .019, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .395) while attention remained a significant predictor of academic performance (\\u003cem\\u003eβ\\u003c/em\\u003e = .201, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001), suggesting full mediation.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eFor the interference dimension (Fig.\\u0026nbsp;\\u003cspan refid=\\\"Fig1\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e1\\u003c/span\\u003ec), Model 1 demonstrated a significant negative total effect on academic performance (\\u003cem\\u003eβ\\u003c/em\\u003e = − .054, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .034). Model 2 showed that interference significantly predicted decreased attention (\\u003cem\\u003eβ\\u003c/em\\u003e = − .072, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .011). In the full mediation model (Model 3), the direct effect of interference became non-significant (\\u003cem\\u003eβ\\u003c/em\\u003e = − .04, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .116) while attention maintained a significant positive effect on academic performance (\\u003cem\\u003eβ\\u003c/em\\u003e = .204, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001), indicating full mediation.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cdiv class=\\\"gridtable\\\"\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\" colnum=\\\"1\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\" colnum=\\\"2\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\" colnum=\\\"3\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\" colnum=\\\"4\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\" colnum=\\\"5\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\" colnum=\\\"6\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\" colnum=\\\"7\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003ctable float=\\\"Yes\\\" id=\\\"Tab3\\\" border=\\\"1\\\"\\u003e\\u003ccaption language=\\\"En\\\"\\u003e \\u003cdiv class=\\\"CaptionNumber\\\"\\u003eTable 3\\u003c/div\\u003e \\u003cdiv class=\\\"CaptionContent\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eMediation effect test results of attention between communication and interaction, accompanying, interference, and academic performance.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/div\\u003e \\u003c/caption\\u003e\\u003ccolgroup cols=\\\"7\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/colgroup\\u003e\\u003cthead\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eAcademic Performance\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e(Model 1)\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c5\\\" namest=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eAttention\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e(Model 2)\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c7\\\" namest=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eAcademic Performance\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e(Model 3)\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003c/thead\\u003e\\u003ctbody\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eβ\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eβ\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eβ\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003eIndependent variable\\u003c/b\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eCommunication and Interaction\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e0.055\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u0026lt; .001\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e0.111\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u0026lt; .001\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e0.035\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.004\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003eIntermediary variable\\u003c/b\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eAttention\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e0.182\\u003csup\\u003e***\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u0026lt; .001\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003eModel\\u003c/b\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c5\\\" namest=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c7\\\" namest=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e5.926\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c5\\\" namest=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e9.925\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c7\\\" namest=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e8.402\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eAdjusted \\u003cem\\u003eR\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csup\\u003e2\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.059\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c5\\\" namest=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.101\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c7\\\" namest=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.093\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003eIndependent variable\\u003c/b\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c5\\\" namest=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c7\\\" namest=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eAccompanying\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e0.056\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.010\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e0.185\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u0026lt; .001\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e0.019\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.395\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003eIntermediary variable\\u003c/b\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c5\\\" namest=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c7\\\" namest=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eAttention\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c5\\\" namest=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e0.201\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u0026lt; .001\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eN\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c5\\\" namest=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c7\\\" namest=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e4.502\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c5\\\" namest=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e8.725\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c7\\\" namest=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e7.712\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eAdjusted \\u003cem\\u003eR\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csup\\u003e2\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.055\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c5\\\" namest=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.089\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c7\\\" namest=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.085\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003eIndependent variable\\u003c/b\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c5\\\" namest=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c7\\\" namest=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eInterference\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e-0.054\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e0.034\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e-0.072\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e0.011\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e-0.040\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.116\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003eIntermediary variable\\u003c/b\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c5\\\" namest=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c7\\\" namest=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eAttention\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c5\\\" namest=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e0.204\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u0026lt; .001\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cb\\u003eModel\\u003c/b\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c5\\\" namest=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c7\\\" namest=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e4.287\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c5\\\" namest=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e3.294\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c7\\\" namest=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e7.783\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eAdjusted \\u003cem\\u003eR\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csup\\u003e2\\u003c/sup\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.052\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c5\\\" namest=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.028\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c7\\\" namest=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.087\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003c/tbody\\u003e\\u003ctfoot\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd colspan=\\\"7\\\"\\u003eNote: The control variables are the gender of the child and that of the foster parent, whether the child is an only child, place of residence, parental education, and household economic status.\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003c/tfoot\\u003e\\u003c/table\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eFor the neglect dimension, preliminary analysis showed no significant total effect on academic performance (\\u003cem\\u003eβ\\u003c/em\\u003e = -0.028, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .205), thus precluding the need for further mediation analysis.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003e2.3 Discussion\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eStudy 1 confirmed our theoretical expectations regarding the significant impact of parental companionship on children's development. As predicted, positive forms of parental companionship (communication and interaction, and accompanying) promoted both children's attention and academic performance. We also found that the negative companionship behaviors (interference) undermined these developmental outcomes. These contrasting effects underscore the critical role of parental companionship quality in shaping children's cognitive and academic development.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThe mediation analyses further clarified these relationships by identifying attention as a key mechanism. Attention fully mediated the effect of accompanying and interference on academic performance, suggesting that these parental behaviors primarily influence academic outcomes through their impact on children's attentional processes. For communication and interaction, attention served as a partial mediator, indicating both direct and indirect pathways to academic performance.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThese findings support our theoretical predictions and align with previous research on parent-child relationships and cognitive development. The positive effects of communication and interaction, as well as stable companionship and support from parents, likely stem from their role in enhancing children's learning motivation and cognitive development. When parents engage in positive companionship behaviors, they may create a supportive learning environment that facilitates the development of attention skills and effective learning strategies. Conversely, parental interference appears to disrupt children's attentional processes, potentially by creating cognitive load or emotional stress that impairs learning.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eTo further understand the specific mechanisms through which parental companionship influences attentional, Study 2 was designed to examine the three distinct attentional network using the ANT. This follow-up study compared children with high versus low levels of parental companionship investigate potential differences in alerting, orienting, and executive control functions of attention.\\u003c/p\\u003e\"},{\"header\":\"3 Study 2: Behavioral Experimental on the Attention Network Functions in Children with Different Levels of Parental Companionship\",\"content\":\"\\u003ch2\\u003e3.1 Methods\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003e3.1.1 Participants and Group Assignment\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eValid questionnaires were collected from 384 fifth and sixth grade students from two primary schools (118 from Chongqing Chaoyang Primary School and 266 from Guangzhou Petrochemical Primary School). Based on their scores on the Parental Companionship Scale (identical to Study 1), students were assigned to groups using a criterion of ± 1 standard deviation (SD) from the mean (\\u003cem\\u003eM\\u003c/em\\u003e = 46.12, \\u003cem\\u003eSD\\u003c/em\\u003e = 14.19). Students scoring below 32 were assigned to the low companionship group, while though scoring above 60 were assigned to the high companionship group. Initially 61 students from each group were selected to participate in the Attention Network Test (ANT), with 110 successfully completing the experiment (57 in the low companionship group and 53 in the high companionship group). Prior to the experiment, the consent of the guardian of the subject is required and an informed consent form is signed. The guardian must be present during the experiment and has the right to terminate the experiment at any time. Following Nosek and Banaji's (2001) recommendation, participants with accuracy rates below 80% were excluded to prevent the influence of random responding, resulting in a final sample of 106 participants (53 in the low companionship group and 53 in the high companionship group; see Table\\u0026nbsp;\\u003cspan refid=\\\"Tab4\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e4\\u003c/span\\u003e for their demographic information).\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cdiv class=\\\"gridtable\\\"\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\" colnum=\\\"1\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\" colnum=\\\"2\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\" colnum=\\\"3\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003ctable float=\\\"Yes\\\" id=\\\"Tab4\\\" border=\\\"1\\\"\\u003e\\u003ccaption language=\\\"En\\\"\\u003e \\u003cdiv class=\\\"CaptionNumber\\\"\\u003eTable 4\\u003c/div\\u003e \\u003cdiv class=\\\"CaptionContent\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eDescriptive Information of Participants in the Low and High Companionship Groups.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/div\\u003e \\u003c/caption\\u003e\\u003ccolgroup cols=\\\"3\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/colgroup\\u003e\\u003cthead\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eLow companionship\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eHigh companionship\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003c/thead\\u003e\\u003ctbody\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eN\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e53\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e53\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eSex (M:F)\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e18:35\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e28:25\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eAge (\\u003cem\\u003eM\\u003c/em\\u003e ± \\u003cem\\u003eSD\\u003c/em\\u003e, in years)\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e11.30 ± .89\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e11.09 ± .86\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eParental companionship Score (\\u003cem\\u003eM\\u003c/em\\u003e ± \\u003cem\\u003eSD\\u003c/em\\u003e)\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e24.38 ± 6.4\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e64.66 ± 3.1\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003c/tbody\\u003e\\u003c/table\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003e3.1.2 Materials and Procedure\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eParticipants were required to completed the questionnaires and report their academic performance as in Study 1. In the behavioral experiment, the classic Attention Network Test (ANT; Fan et al., 2002) was administered using E-prime 2.0 software (RRID:SCR_009567). Schematic diagram of the time line in each trial of this task was shown in Fig.\\u0026nbsp;\\u003cspan refid=\\\"Fig2\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e2\\u003c/span\\u003e. Each trial began with a central fixation cross, followed by a cue stimulus after a variable interval (400-1600ms).. Four cue conditions were employed: (\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR1\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e1\\u003c/span\\u003e) no cue, where only the fixation cross remained; (\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR2\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2\\u003c/span\\u003e) central cue, where an asterisk appeared at the fixation point; (\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR3\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e3\\u003c/span\\u003e) double cue, where two asterisks appearing simultaneously above and below the fixation point; and (\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR4\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e4\\u003c/span\\u003e) spatial cue, where a single asterisk appearing either above or below the fixation point, validly indicating the upcoming target location. The cue was presented for 100ms, followed by a cue-to-target interval for 400ms. The target display was then presented for 400 ms, consisting of a central arrow pointing either left or right, flanked by two arrows on each side. Three flanker conditions were used: (\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR1\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e1\\u003c/span\\u003e) in the congruent condition, all arrows pointed in the same direction (e.g., →→→→→); (\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR2\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e2\\u003c/span\\u003e) in the incongruent condition, the flanking arrows pointed in the opposite direction to the central target (e.g., →→←→→); and (\\u003cspan citationid=\\\"CR3\\\" class=\\\"CitationRef\\\"\\u003e3\\u003c/span\\u003e) in the neutral condition, the target arrow was flanked by dashes (e.g., --→--). Participants were instructed to indicate the direction of the central target arrow as quickly and accurately as possible using designated response keys.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThe experiment employed a 4 (cue type: no cue, center cue, double cue, spatial cue) × 3 (flanker type: neutral, congruent, incongruent) within-subjects design. Each combination of conditions appeared equally often, with 24 trials per condition in the experimental blocks. The experimenter provided detailed instructions and answered all questions before participants provided informed consent. Participants then completed on practice block (24 trials) followed by three experimental blocks (96 trials each, totaling 288 trials). Optional breaks were provided between blocks. The entire experiment lasted approximately 30 minutes. Optional breaks were provided between blocks.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThree attention network effects in reaction time (RT) were calculated: alerting effect (RT in the no-cue condition \\u003cem\\u003eminus\\u003c/em\\u003e RT in the central cue condition), orienting effect (RT in the double cue condition \\u003cem\\u003eminus\\u003c/em\\u003e RT in the spatial cue condition), and executive control effect (RT in the incongruent condition \\u003cem\\u003eminus\\u003c/em\\u003e RT in the congruent condition), with larger alerting and orienting effect in addition to small executive control effect indicating better function of the corresponding network. For the calculation of mean reaction times in each condition, incorrect responses were excluded, as were trials with RT below 100ms and those exceeding three standard deviations from the mean. The overall accuracy rate was 96.40%, and 91.67% of trials remained after data trimming. Specifically, the low companionship group achieved an accuracy rate of 96.47%, with 91.23% of trials remaining after data trimming. Meanwhile, the high companionship group had an accuracy rate of 96.32%, with 92.16% of trials remaining after data trimming.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003e3.1.3 Statistical Analyses\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eAge and gender were included as covariates in all analyses to control for their potential influences. For the ANT data, we first conducted independent samples t-tests to compare the three attention network effects (alerting, orienting, and executive control) between the high and low parental companionship groups. For any attention network effect showing significant group differences, we further conducted a 2 (group: high vs. low companionship) × 2 (condition) mixed ANOVA, with group as the between-subjects factor and the two conditions used to calculate that specific effect (e.g., no cue vs. center cue for alerting effect) as the within-subjects factor. This follow-up analysis aimed to determine which specific condition(s) contributed to the observed group differences in the attention network effects.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eTo examine the relationships among attention networks, we calculated Pearson correlations between the three attention network effects separately for each group. Fisher's z-tests were then conducted to determine whether these correlational patterns differed significantly between groups. Finally, independent samples t-tests were conducted to examine group differences in attention questionnaire scores and academic performance. Additionally, we examined the associations between attention questionnaire scores and attention network effects using Pearson correlations, followed by Fisher's z-tests to compare these correlations between groups. Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen's d for t-tests and partial eta-squared for ANOVAs. The significance level was set at \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .05 for all analyses.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003e3.2 Results\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003e3.2.1 Attention Network Effects\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eDetailed descriptive statistics and test results for all attention network effects are presented in Table\\u0026nbsp;\\u003cspan refid=\\\"Tab5\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e5\\u003c/span\\u003e and \\u003cb\\u003eFig.\\u0026nbsp;3\\u003c/b\\u003e. Independent sample t-test analysis revealed significant differences in alerting effects between the high and the low companionship group, \\u003cem\\u003et\\u003c/em\\u003e(104) = 2.079, \\u003cem\\u003ep =\\u003c/em\\u003e .04 \\u0026lt; .05, \\u003cem\\u003ed\\u003c/em\\u003e = .408, indicating better alerting function in the low companionship group than in the high companionship group. This group difference remained significant after controlling for age and gender, \\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e(3,102) = 3.404, \\u003cem\\u003ep =\\u003c/em\\u003e .021\\u0026lt;.05, \\u003cem\\u003eη\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u003csup\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e2\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sup\\u003e = .091. To further examine this group difference, a 2 (group) × 2 (cue: no cue vs. center cue) mixed ANOVA was conducted. The Shapiro-Wilk test indicated that the data in each group were normally distributed. However, the Mauchly’s test of sphericity showed that the assumption of sphericity was violated (Mauchly W = 1.000, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001). Therefore, the results from the univariate ANOVA with Greenhouse-Geisser correction were adopted. Results showed that the main effect of condition was significant, \\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e = 7.028, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001, \\u003cem\\u003eη\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sub\\u003e ² = .064. The main effect of group was insignificant, \\u003cem\\u003eF =\\u003c/em\\u003e .065, \\u003cem\\u003ep = .\\u003c/em\\u003e799, \\u003cem\\u003eη\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e² =\\u003c/em\\u003e.001 and the interaction between condition and group was marginally significant, \\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e = 2.955, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .089, \\u003cem\\u003eη\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e²\\u003c/em\\u003e = .028. Due to the marginal significance of the interaction, simple effect tests and post-hoc tests were conducted. The results showed that in the no-cue condition, the simple effect of group was insignificant, \\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e = .001, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .982, \\u003cem\\u003eη\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e²\\u003c/em\\u003e= .000. In the central cue condition, the simple effect of group was also insignificant, \\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e = .241, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .625, \\u003cem\\u003eη\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e²\\u003c/em\\u003e = .002. And in high companionship group, the simple effect of condition was significant, \\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e = 480.055, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; 0.001, \\u003cem\\u003eη\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e²\\u003c/em\\u003e = .825; In low companionship group, the simple effect of condition was also significant, \\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e = 593.983, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001, \\u003cem\\u003eη\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e²\\u003c/em\\u003e = .853. Subsequent multiple comparisons revealed that, regardless of whether it was the high companionship group or the low companionship group, the no-cue condition was significantly higher than the central cue condition (\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001) indicating that the no-cue had a greater arousal effect on children in the high and low companionship group.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThe orienting network effects showed a significant group difference, \\u003cem\\u003et\\u003c/em\\u003e(104)= -2.020, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .046 \\u0026lt; .05, \\u003cem\\u003ed\\u003c/em\\u003e = − .396, indicating better the orienting effect in the high companionship group than in the low companionship group. This group difference was insignificant after controlling for age and gender, \\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e(3,102) = 1.873, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .139, \\u003cem\\u003eη\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e²\\u003c/em\\u003e = .052. To further examine the group difference, a 2 (group) × 2 (cue: double vs. spatial cue) mixed ANOVA was conducted. The Shapiro-Wilk test indicated that the data in each group were normally distributed. However, the Mauchly’s test of sphericity showed that the assumption of sphericity was violated (Mauchly W = 1.000, p \\u0026lt; .001). Therefore, the results from the univariate ANOVA with Greenhouse-Geisser correction were adopted. Results showed that the main effects of condition and group were not significant, but the interaction between condition and group was marginally significant, \\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e = 2.861, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .094, \\u003cem\\u003eη\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e²\\u003c/em\\u003e = .027. Due to the marginal significance of the interaction, simple effect tests and post-hoc tests were conducted. The results showed that in the double-cue condition, the simple effect of group was not significant, \\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e = .726, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .396, \\u003cem\\u003eη\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e²\\u003c/em\\u003e = .007; in the spatial cue condition, the simple effect of group was also not significant, \\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e = .120, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .729, \\u003cem\\u003eη\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e²\\u003c/em\\u003e= .001. In the high companionship group, the simple effect of condition was significant, \\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e = 44.191, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001, \\u003cem\\u003eη\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e²\\u003c/em\\u003e = .302; In the low companionship group, the simple effect of condition was also significant, \\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e = 17.854, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001, \\u003cem\\u003eη\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e²\\u003c/em\\u003e = .149. Subsequent multiple comparisons revealed that, in both the high and low companionship groups, the double-cue condition was significantly higher than the spatial cue condition (\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001) indicating that the double-cue had a greater arousal effect on children in the high and low companionship group.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eNo significant difference was found in executive control effects between the groups, \\u003cem\\u003et\\u003c/em\\u003e(104) = .179, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .859 \\u0026gt; .05, \\u003cem\\u003ed\\u003c/em\\u003e = .035. This group difference remained insignificant after controlling for age and gender, \\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e(3,102) = 2.159, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .097, \\u003cem\\u003eη\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e²\\u003c/em\\u003e = .06.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cdiv class=\\\"gridtable\\\"\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\" colnum=\\\"1\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\" colnum=\\\"2\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\" colnum=\\\"3\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\" colnum=\\\"4\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\" colnum=\\\"5\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\" colnum=\\\"6\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\" colnum=\\\"7\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\" colnum=\\\"8\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\" colnum=\\\"9\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c10\\\" colnum=\\\"10\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003ctable float=\\\"Yes\\\" id=\\\"Tab5\\\" border=\\\"1\\\"\\u003e\\u003ccaption language=\\\"En\\\"\\u003e \\u003cdiv class=\\\"CaptionNumber\\\"\\u003eTable 5\\u003c/div\\u003e \\u003cdiv class=\\\"CaptionContent\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eAttention Network Effects in Reaction Times (ms) for Low and High Companionship Groups.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/div\\u003e \\u003c/caption\\u003e\\u003ccolgroup cols=\\\"10\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/colgroup\\u003e\\u003cthead\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"3\\\" nameend=\\\"c4\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eLow companionship\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c6\\\" namest=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eHigh companionship\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c10\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003c/thead\\u003e\\u003ctbody\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eM\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eSD\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eM\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eSD\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003et\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003edf\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c10\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ed\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eAlerting RT\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e78.99\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c4\\\" namest=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e24.63\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e69.51\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e22.25\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e2.08\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e104\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u0026lt; .05\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c10\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.41\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eOrienting RT\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e13.29\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c4\\\" namest=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e26.18\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e22.57\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e20.82\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e-2.02\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e104\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u0026lt; .05\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c10\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e− .40\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eExecutive control\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e51.37\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c4\\\" namest=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e21.91\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e50.65\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e19.42\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.179\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e104\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u0026gt; .05\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c10\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.035\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003c/tbody\\u003e\\u003c/table\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003e3.2.2 Attention Scale and Academic Performance\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eIndependent samples t-tests showed that the low companionship group scored significantly lower on the Attention Scale compared to the high companionship group, \\u003cem\\u003et\\u003c/em\\u003e(104) = 3.696, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001, \\u003cem\\u003ed\\u003c/em\\u003e = .718). This group difference remained significant after controlling for age and gender, \\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e(1,102) = 7.214, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e \\u0026lt; .001, \\u003cem\\u003eη\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sub\\u003e\\u003csup\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e2\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sup\\u003e = .175. Similarly, the low companionship group demonstrated significantly lower academic performance compared to the high companionship group, \\u003cem\\u003et\\u003c/em\\u003e(104) = 2.835, \\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e = .006 \\u0026lt; .001, \\u003cem\\u003ed\\u003c/em\\u003e = .551. This group difference remained significant after controlling for age and gender, \\u003cem\\u003eF\\u003c/em\\u003e(1,102) = 4.874, \\u003cem\\u003ep =\\u003c/em\\u003e .003 \\u0026lt;.01, \\u003cem\\u003eη\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003csub\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sub\\u003e\\u003csup\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003e2\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/sup\\u003e = .125. Detailed results are presented in Table\\u0026nbsp;\\u003cspan refid=\\\"Tab6\\\" class=\\\"InternalRef\\\"\\u003e6\\u003c/span\\u003e.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cdiv class=\\\"gridtable\\\"\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\" colnum=\\\"1\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\" colnum=\\\"2\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\" colnum=\\\"3\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\" colnum=\\\"4\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\" colnum=\\\"5\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\" colnum=\\\"6\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\" colnum=\\\"7\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\" colnum=\\\"8\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003cdiv align=\\\"left\\\" class=\\\"colspec\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\" colnum=\\\"9\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003ctable float=\\\"Yes\\\" id=\\\"Tab6\\\" border=\\\"1\\\"\\u003e\\u003ccaption language=\\\"En\\\"\\u003e \\u003cdiv class=\\\"CaptionNumber\\\"\\u003eTable 6\\u003c/div\\u003e \\u003cdiv class=\\\"CaptionContent\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eAttention and Academic Performance of Low and High Companionship Groups.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/div\\u003e \\u003c/caption\\u003e\\u003ccolgroup cols=\\\"9\\\"\\u003e\\u003c/colgroup\\u003e\\u003cthead\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c3\\\" namest=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eLow companionship\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colspan=\\\"2\\\" nameend=\\\"c5\\\" namest=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eHigh companionship\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003cth align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/th\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003c/thead\\u003e\\u003ctbody\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e\\u0026nbsp;\\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eM\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eSD\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eM\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003eSD\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003et\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003edf\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ep\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u003cem\\u003ed\\u003c/em\\u003e\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eAttention\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e14.92\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e2.85\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e16.87\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e2.56\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e3.696\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e104\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e\\u0026lt; .001\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.718\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003ctr\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c1\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eAcademic Performance\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c2\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e-0.55\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c3\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e3.11\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c4\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e0.78\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c5\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e1.39\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c6\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e2.835\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c7\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e104\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c8\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.006\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003ctd align=\\\"left\\\" colname=\\\"c9\\\"\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e.551\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/td\\u003e\\u003c/tr\\u003e\\u003c/tbody\\u003e\\u003c/table\\u003e\\u003c/div\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003e3.3 Discussion\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eStudy 2 demonstrates that effective parental companionship has a positive effect on children’s cognitive development. While no group differences emerged in orienting and executive control networks, the low companionship group showed stronger alerting effects, thus supporting Hypothesis 3. The mixed ANOVA revealed that both groups showed significantly greater arousal effects in no-cue versus central cue conditions, suggesting that the alertness advantage of children in the low companionship group may come at the cost of diminished selective attention. This interpretation is supported by the observed group differences in attention regulation and academic performance. Despite having higher alertness, the low companionship group significantly lagged behind in both attentional regulatory capacity and academic achievement.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eThe low companionship group’s heightened alertness paired with academic deficits suggests their vigilance reflects hyper-responsiveness to nonspecific stimuli rather than adaptive control. This pattern extends Study 1’s findings: parental companionship not only significantly predicts overall attention capacity but may also influence learning efficiency by shaping distinct developmental pathways of attention networks. Specifically, children in the low companionship group may develop an automated vigilance to nonspecific environmental cues, yet this compensatory mechanism fails to translate into effective learning adaptability. Growing up in an environment characterized by uncertainty may enhance bottom-up, stimulus-driven attention while weakening top-down, goal-oriented control.\\u003c/p\\u003e\"},{\"header\":\"4 General discussion\",\"content\":\"\\u003cp\\u003eStudy 1 identified significant effects of parental companionship on children\\u0026rsquo;s attention as measured by questionnaires: positive dimensions (such as communication and interaction, accompanying) significantly positively affected children\\u0026rsquo;s attention, while negative dimensions (such as interference) significantly negatively impacted it. These findings align with prior research indicating that parental involvement may have a significant positive effect on students\\u0026rsquo; cognitive abilities, whereas negative parenting behaviors and attitudes may have a negative influence on children\\u0026rsquo;s attention (Yang, Qian, \\u0026amp; Xia, 2024; Barnow et al., 2004; Ellis \\u0026amp; Nigg, 2009; Rogers et al., 2009; Keown, 2012; Breaux \\u0026amp; Harvey, 2019; Demmer et al., 2018). During children\\u0026rsquo;s growth process, a lack of parental companionship may lead to reduced behavioral norms and supervision for children, subsequently increasing unstructured behaviors such as playing with mobile phones, watching TV, daydreaming, etc., which affect the development of children\\u0026rsquo;s attention. Additionally, children tend to imitate their parents\\u0026rsquo; behaviors. If parents appear absent-minded when accompanying their children or excessively interfere when children are exploring independently, children may perceive this inconsistency, potentially developing habits of distraction.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eFurthermore, attention partially mediated the relationship between communication and interaction and children\\u0026rsquo;s academic performance, and fully mediated the relationship between accompanying partners, distractions, and children\\u0026rsquo;s academic performance, suggesting that communication and interaction, accompanying partners, and distractions may affect children\\u0026rsquo;s academic performance by influencing their attention. From the perspectives of heredity and environment, the family and school environments are crucial for the development of children\\u0026rsquo;s basic cognitive abilities. A good family is important for the development of children\\u0026rsquo;s cognitive abilities, and parenting styles, level of involvement, and economic status can positively influence children\\u0026rsquo;s attention (Greenberg et al., 2003). Meanwhile, the learning activities children engage in all depend on the development of attention, which is a fundamental cognitive ability for children to perform well. Children with focused attention can engage in more specialized academic learning for extended periods; they can also concentrate when taking academic tests. On the other hand, children with attention disorders are more prone to emotional issues, such as irritability and low mood, which significantly impair the acquisition of academic skills (Mackenbach et al., 2008).\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eIn this study, no significant negative predictive effect of neglect on academic performance was found. This may be because neglect is multidimensional but Study 1 mainly investigated emotional neglect, rather than educational neglect, and supervisory neglect etc. Different types of neglect may have different impacts on children. Emotional neglect primarily affects children\\u0026rsquo;s internalizing problems and emotional abilities (Zhang et al., 2024). Additionally, in some cases, other support systems for children (such as schools and peers) may compensate for parental emotional neglect, especially for children in the stage of intimate friendship sharing (Selman, 1980). From the perspective of developmental psychology, children at this stage spend more time interacting with peers, and the mutual influence among peers is constantly increasing. Friendship is an important source of their security or social support, and they often change their behavior by observing the behavior patterns of peer role models. In summary, the results reveal that the impact of parental neglect on academic performance is complex and has multiple causes. Further investigations into the effects of different dimensions of neglect on children\\u0026rsquo;s attention and academic performance can be conducted in the future.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eStudy 2 further validated the impact of parental companionship on attention through experiments, finding that effective parental companionship promoted children\\u0026rsquo;s cognitive development. The results showed no differences in orienting network effects or executive control network effects between the high and low companionship groups; however, differences were observed in alerting network effects, with the alerting network effect value being higher in the low-companionship group. That is, the central cue has a greater arousal effect on the low-companionship group. The functions of the alerting network include the ability to maintain attention (phasic alertness) and the ability to prepare for responses to external stimuli (tonic alertness) (Pozuelos et al., 2014). The higher alerting network effect value in the low companionship group may indicate a stronger ability to maintain attention, i.e., the persistence of attention, manifesting as prolonged investment in learning objects, which is beneficial for learning. However, this conflicts with previous research (Yu \\u0026amp; Smith, 2016). The higher alerting network effect value may also suggest that the low companionship group has a stronger readiness to respond to external stimuli, making their attention more susceptible to external irrelevant stimuli, thereby reducing classroom listening quality or learning efficiency and affecting children\\u0026rsquo;s academic performance. Since the results of Study 2 indicate that the academic performance of children in the high-companionship group was significantly better than that of children in the low-companionship group, so the higher alerting network effect value in the low-companionship group was more likely due to tonic alertness, i.e., a stronger readiness to respond to external stimuli.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eGiven the significant impact of parental companionship on children\\u0026rsquo;s attention and academic performance, this study suggests that efforts should be made by parents to improve the quality of parental companionship, thereby enhancing children\\u0026rsquo;s attention and academic performance. Only when parents become aware of the importance of education and the significance of their own behaviors and attitudes for their children\\u0026rsquo;s growth can they better create a good family environment, contributing to the improvement and development of their children\\u0026rsquo;s attention and helping them succeed. Therefore, this study provides the following suggestions concerning parental companionship: in daily life, parents should actively engage in deep and sufficient communication and interaction with their children in terms of learning, emotions, and other aspects, and provide a warm companionship environment for them. The results indicate that mere accompanying can be beneficial; for instance, when children are reading, parents can quietly accompany them without spending excessive time on electronic devices.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eThis study offers some ideas for future research but also has certain limitations. Firstly, Study 1 mainly used questionnaires completed by students, and their understanding and reports of parental companionship may deviate from reality. If other methods such as interviews were also used, more evidence could support our findings. Secondly, the underlying reasons for the higher alerting effect in the low-companionship group compared to the high-companionship group, as observed in Study 2, need further exploration. Although the orienting effect was not significant between the high and low groups, it had already reached marginal significance. The sample size of Study 2 could be increased in the future for further testing. Furthermore, the behavioral experiment did not explore the differences in the interaction between the three attention networks among children with different levels of parental companionship. For example, separating alerting and orienting cues might result in a larger orienting effect when an alerting cue is present, as it causes higher levels of attentional readiness among participants; there may also be an inhibitory relationship between the alerting and executive attention networks, where an alerting cue leads to greater flanker interference (Pozuelos et al., 2014). Future studies could separate the cues of the three networks to better understand the impacts of parental companionship on attention.\\u003c/p\\u003e\"},{\"header\":\"5 Conclusion\",\"content\":\"\\u003cp\\u003eThis research provides new evidence for the relationships among parental companionship, children\\u0026rsquo;s attention and academic performance. It found that the positive dimensions of parental companionship, such as communication and interaction, accompanying, significantly positively predicted children\\u0026rsquo;s attention and academic performance, while the negative dimension of interference significantly negatively predicted them. Further mediation effect analysis showed that attention played a fully mediating role between accompanying, interference, and academic performance, and a partially mediating role between communication and interaction and academic performance. Additionally, this study explored the impact of parental companionship on children\\u0026rsquo;s attention network effects, finding that the alerting network effect value was significantly higher in the low-companionship group than in the high-companionship group, indicating that the central cue had a greater arousal effect on low-companionship children. Although there were no significant differences in orienting network and executive network effects between the high and low companionship groups, the difference in orienting network effects had already reached a marginal significance level. Future studies need to further focus on the potential impact of parental companionship on children\\u0026rsquo;s attention network effects.\\u003c/p\\u003e\"},{\"header\":\"Declarations\",\"content\":\"\\u003cp\\u003eFunding\\u003c/p\\u003e\\n\\u003cp\\u003eThis work was supported by the Philosophy and Social Science Fund of the 13th Five-year Plan of Guangdong Province of China (grant numbers: GD20CXL03).\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003e \\u003ch2\\u003eConflict of interest\\u003c/h2\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eWe declare no conflict of interest. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e \\u003cstrong\\u003eEthical Approval\\u003c/strong\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003e The study was approved by the South China Normal University (NO.SCNU-PSY-2024-268). All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution and/or national research committee. Parent-informed consent and child assent were obtained from all participants.\\u003c/p\\u003e \\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003eAuthor Contribution\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eX.H. , L.D. and C.C. designed the experiments; L.D. , C.C. and X.H. collected the data; X.H. , L.D. ,T.W. and C.C. analyzed the data. X.H. , L.D. , C.C. and T.W. discussed the results and contributed to the writing of the paper. All authors approved the submitted version.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003eAcknowledgments\\u003c/h2\\u003e \\u003cp\\u003eWe thank Xiaoxiao Cai for the collection of data.\\u003c/p\\u003e\\u003ch2\\u003eData Availability\\u003c/h2\\u003e\\u003cp\\u003eData and materials will be available on request.\\u003c/p\\u003e\"},{\"header\":\"References\",\"content\":\"\\u003col\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eAlavi, M., Seng, J. H., Mustaffa, M. S., Ninggal, M. T., Amini, M., \\u0026amp; Latif, A. A. (2019). Attention, impulsiveness, and gender in academic achievement among typically developing children. \\u003cem\\u003ePerceptual and Motor Skills\\u003c/em\\u003e,\\u003cem\\u003e 126\\u003c/em\\u003e(1), 5-24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031512518809163\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eBarnow, S., Lucht, M., Hamm, A., John, U., \\u0026amp; Freyberger, H. J. (2004). The relation of a family history of alcoholism, obstetric complications and family environment to behavioral problems among 154 adolescents in Germany: Results from the children of alcoholics study in Pomerania. \\u003cem\\u003eEuropean Addiction Research, 10\\u003c/em\\u003e(1), 8-14. https://doi.org/10.1159/000073721\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eBehrman, J. R., Schott, W., Mani, S., Crookston, B. T., Dearden, K., Le Thuc, D., . . . Stein, A. D. (2017). Intergenerational transmission of poverty and inequality: Parental resources and schooling attainment and children\\u0026rsquo;s human capital in Ethiopia, India, Peru, and Vietnam. \\u003cem\\u003eEconomic Development and Cultural Change, 65\\u003c/em\\u003e(4), 657-697. https://doi.org/10.1086/691971\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eBenner, A. D., Boyle, A. E., \\u0026amp; Sadler, S. (2016). Parental involvement and adolescents\\u0026rsquo; educational success: The roles of prior achievement and socioeconomic status. \\u003cem\\u003eJournal of Youth and Adolescence, 45\\u003c/em\\u003e(6), 1053-1064. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-016-0431-4\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eBreaux, R. P., \\u0026amp; Harvey, E. A. (2019). A longitudinal study of the relation between family functioning and preschool ADHD symptoms. \\u003cem\\u003eJournal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 48\\u003c/em\\u003e(5), 749-764. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2018.1437737\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eCheng, X., \\u0026amp; Zhou, S. (2023). The influence mechanism of parental emotional companionship on children\\u0026rsquo;s second language acquisition. \\u003cem\\u003eFrontiers in Psychology, 13\\u003c/em\\u003e. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1034867\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eClaussen, A. H., Holbrook, J. R., Hutchins, H. J., Robinson, L. R., Bloomfield, J., Meng, L., ... Kaminski, J. W. (2024). All in the family? A systematic review and meta-analysis of parenting and family environment as risk factors for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in Children. \\u003cem\\u003ePrevention Science, 25\\u003c/em\\u003e(2), 249-271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-022-01358-4\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eDatu, J. A. D., \\u0026amp; Buenconsejo, J. U. (2021). Academic engagement and achievement predict career adaptability. \\u003cem\\u003eCareer Development Quarterly, 69\\u003c/em\\u003e(1), 34-48. https://doi.org/10.1002/cdq.12247\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eDeault, L. C. (2010). A systematic review of parenting in relation to the development of comorbidities and functional impairments in children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). \\u003cem\\u003eChild Psychiatry \\u0026amp; Human Development, 41\\u003c/em\\u003e(2), 168-192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-009-0159-4\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eDemmer, D. H., Puccio, F., Stokes, M. A., McGillivray, J. A., \\u0026amp; Hooley, M. (2018). The influence of child gender on the prospective relationships between parenting and child ADHD. \\u003cem\\u003eJournal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 46\\u003c/em\\u003e(1), 113-125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-017-0284-7\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eDuckworth, A. L., \\u0026amp; Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Self-discipline outdoes IQ in predicting academic performance of adolescents. \\u003cem\\u003ePsychological Science, 16\\u003c/em\\u003e(12), 939-944. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01641.x\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eEllis, B., \\u0026amp; Nigg, J. (2009). Parenting practices and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: New findings suggest partial specificity of effects. \\u003cem\\u003eJournal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 48\\u003c/em\\u003e(2), 146-154. https://doi.org/10.1097/chi.0b013e31819176d0\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eEpstein, J. L. (1990). School and family connections: theory, research, and implications for integrating sociologies of education and family. \\u003cem\\u003eMarriage \\u0026amp; Family Review, 15\\u003c/em\\u003e(2), 99. https://doi.org/10.1300/j002v15n01_06\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eFan, J., McCandliss, B. D., Fossella, J., Flombaum, J. I., \\u0026amp; Posner, M. I. (2005). The activation of attentional networks. \\u003cem\\u003eNeuroimage, 26\\u003c/em\\u003e(2), 471-479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.02.004\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eFan, J., McCandliss, B. D., Sommer, T., Raz, A., \\u0026amp; Posner, M. I. (2002). Testing the efficiency and independence of attentional networks. \\u003cem\\u003eJournal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14\\u003c/em\\u003e(3), 340-347. https://doi.org/10.1162/089892902317361886\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eFlores, J., Caqueo-Urizar, A., Lopez, V., \\u0026amp; Acevedo, D. (2022). Symptomatology of attention deficit, hyperactivity and defiant behavior as predictors of academic achievement. \\u003cem\\u003eBmc Psychiatry, 22\\u003c/em\\u003e(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-022-03714-8\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eGreenberg, M. T., Weissberg, R. P., O\\u0026rsquo;Brien, M. U., Zins, J. E., Fredericks, L., Resnik, H., \\u0026amp; Elias, M. J. (2003). Enhancing school-based prevention and youth development through coordinated social, emotional, and academic learning. \\u003cem\\u003eAmerican Psychologist, 58\\u003c/em\\u003e(6-7), 466-474. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.58.6-7.466\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eHawes, D. J., Dadds, M. R., Frost, A. D. J., \\u0026amp; Russell, A. (2013). Parenting practices and prospective levels of hyperactivity/inattention across early- and middle-childhood. \\u003cem\\u003eJournal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 35\\u003c/em\\u003e(3), 273-282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-013-9341-x\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eHaynes, N. M., Comer, J. P., \\u0026amp; Hamilton-Lee, M. (1989). School climate enhancement through parental involvement. J\\u003cem\\u003eournal of School Psychology\\u003c/em\\u003e, 27(1), 87\\u0026ndash;90. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-4405(89)90034-4\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eJensen, A. C., Whiteman, S. D., Bernard, J. M., \\u0026amp; McHale, S. M. (2017). Family resource allocation after firstborns leave home: implications for secondborns\\u0026rsquo; academic functioning. \\u003cem\\u003eFamily Process, 56\\u003c/em\\u003e(3), 766-780. https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12203\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eJohnson, K. A., Robertson, I. H., Barry, E., Mulligan, A., Daibhis, A., Daly, M., . . . Bellgrove, M. A. (2008). Impaired conflict resolution and alerting in children with ADHD: evidence from the Attention Network Task (ANT). \\u003cem\\u003eJournal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49\\u003c/em\\u003e(12), 1339-1347. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2008.01936.x\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eKeown, L. J. (2012). Predictors of Boys\\u0026rsquo; ADHD Symptoms from early to middle childhood: The role of father-child and mother-child interactions. \\u003cem\\u003eJournal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 40\\u003c/em\\u003e(4), 569-581. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-011-9586-3\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eKratz, O., Studer, P., Malcherek, S., Erbe, K., Moll, G. H., \\u0026amp; Heinrich, H. (2011). Attentional processes in children with ADHD: An event-related potential study using the attention network test. \\u003cem\\u003eInternational Journal of Psychophysiology, 81\\u003c/em\\u003e(2), 82-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2011.05.008\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eLi, J., Li, Z., Lei, X., Yang, J., Yu, X., \\u0026amp; Liu, H. (2022). Longitudinal association between child psychological abuse and neglect and academic achievement in Chinese primary school children: a moderated mediation model. \\u003cem\\u003eFrontiers in Psychology\\u003c/em\\u003e. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.870371\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eMackenbach, J. P., Stirbu, I., Roskam, A.-J. R., Schaap, M. M., Menvielle, G., Leinsalu, M., . . . European Union Working Group, S. (2008). Socioeconomic inequalities in health in 22 European countries. \\u003cem\\u003eNew England Journal of Medicine, 358\\u003c/em\\u003e(23), 2468-2481. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmsa0707519\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eMullane, J. C., Corkum, P. V., Klein, R. M., McLaughlin, E. N., \\u0026amp; Lawrence, M. A. (2011). Alerting, orienting, and executive attention in children with ADHD. \\u003cem\\u003eJournal of Attention Disorders, 15\\u003c/em\\u003e(4), 310-320. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054710366384\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eNosek \\u0026amp; Banaji. (2001). The Go/No-go Association Task. \\u003cem\\u003eSocial Cognition\\u003c/em\\u003e,19(6), 625-664. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.19.6.625.20886\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003ePalacios, D., Dijkstra, J. K., Villalobos, C., Trevi\\u0026ntilde;o, E., Berger, C., Huisman, M., \\u0026amp; Veenstra, R. (2019). Classroom ability composition and the role of academic performance and school misconduct in the formation of academic and friendship networks. \\u003cem\\u003eJournal of School Psychology, 74\\u003c/em\\u003e, 58-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2019.05.006\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003ePosner, M. I., \\u0026amp; Petersen, S. E. (1990). The attention system of the human brain. \\u003cem\\u003eAnnual Review of Neuroscience, 13\\u003c/em\\u003e, 25-42. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ne.13.030190.000325\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003ePozuelos, J. P., Paz-Alonso, P. M., Castillo, A., Fuentes, L. J., \\u0026amp; Rosario Rueda, M. (2014). Development of attention networks and their interactions in childhood. \\u003cem\\u003eDevelopmental Psychology, 50\\u003c/em\\u003e(10), 2405-2415. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037469\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eQing Shui, X.(1999). \\u003cem\\u003eHow to improve children\\u0026apos;s attention.\\u003c/em\\u003e China: Foreign Languages Press.\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eRoeser, R. W., Eccles, J. S., \\u0026amp; Strobel, K. R. (1998). Linking the study of schooling and mental health: Selected issues and empirical illustrations at the level of the individual. \\u003cem\\u003eEducational Psychologist, 33\\u003c/em\\u003e(4), 153-176. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3304_2\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eRogers, M. A., Wiener, J., Marton, I., \\u0026amp; Tannock, R. (2009). Parental involvement in children\\u0026rsquo;s learning: Comparing parents of children with and without Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). \\u003cem\\u003eJournal of School Psychology, 47\\u003c/em\\u003e(3), 167-185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2009.02.001\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eSelman,R.L.(1980).\\u003cem\\u003eThe growth of interpersonal understanding: Developmental and clinical analyses\\u003c/em\\u003e.\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eShelleby, E. C., \\u0026amp; Ogg, J. (2020). Longitudinal relationships between parent involvement, parental warmth, ADHD symptoms, and reading achievement. \\u003cem\\u003eJournal of Attention Disorders, 24\\u003c/em\\u003e(5), 737-749. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054719859075\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eVittadini, G., Sturaro, C., \\u0026amp; Folloni, G. (2022). Non-Cognitive Skills and Cognitive Skills to measure school efficiency. \\u003cem\\u003eSocio-Economic Planning Sciences\\u003c/em\\u003e, 81, 101058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2021.101058\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eWang, M.-T., Hill, N. E., \\u0026amp; Hofkens, T. (2014). Parental involvement and African American and European American adolescents\\u0026rsquo; academic, behavioral, and emotional development in secondary school. \\u003cem\\u003eChild Development, 85\\u003c/em\\u003e(6), 2151-2168. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12284\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eWen, Z., Hau, K-T., \\u0026amp; Marsh, H.W. (2004). Structural equation model testing: Cutoff criteria for goodness of fit indices and chi-square test. \\u003cem\\u003eActa Psychologica Sinica\\u003c/em\\u003e, \\u003cem\\u003e36\\u003c/em\\u003e(2), 186-194.\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eWu, Z., Yu, J., \\u0026amp; Xu, C. (2023). Does screen exposure necessarily relate to behavior problems? The buffering roles of emotion regulation and caregiver companionship. \\u003cem\\u003eEarly Childhood Research Quarterly, 63\\u003c/em\\u003e, 424-433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2023.01.008\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eXuan, B., Mackie, M.-A., Spagna, A., Wu, T., Tian, Y., Hof, P.R., Fan, J.,(2016). The activation of interactive attentional networks.\\u003cem\\u003e NeuroImage\\u003c/em\\u003e,129, 308-319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.01.017\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eYang, F., Qian, Y., \\u0026amp; Xia, Z. (2024). Cognitive ability and locus of control: the effect of parental involvement on the academic performance of elementary and secondary school students. \\u003cem\\u003eCurrent Psychology, 43\\u003c/em\\u003e(3), 2816-2831. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04572-7\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eYu, C., \\u0026amp; Smith, Linda\\u0026ensp;B. (2016). The Social Origins of Sustained Attention in One-Year-Old Human Infants. \\u003cem\\u003eCurrent Biology, 26\\u003c/em\\u003e(9), 1235-1240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2016.03.026\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eZhang, Z., Fu, L., Jing, W., \\u0026amp; Liao, Z. (2023). Childhood parental companionship, self-esteem and prosocial behavior in college students: A correlation analysis. \\u003cem\\u003eArchives of Psychiatric Nursing, 43\\u003c/em\\u003e, 87-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnu.2023.01.002\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003cli\\u003eZhang, Y., Xu, W., McDonnell, D., \\u0026amp; Wang, J. L. (2024). The relationship between childhood maltreatment subtypes and adolescent internalizing problems: The mediating role of maladaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies. \\u003cem\\u003eChild Abuse \\u0026amp; Neglect\\u003c/em\\u003e, 152, Article 106796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2024.106796\\u003c/li\\u003e\\n\\u003c/ol\\u003e\"}],\"fulltextSource\":\"\",\"fullText\":\"\",\"funders\":[],\"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow\":false,\"hasManuscriptDocX\":true,\"hasOptedInToPreprint\":true,\"hasPassedJournalQc\":\"\",\"hasAnyPriority\":false,\"hideJournal\":false,\"highlight\":\"\",\"institution\":\"\",\"isAcceptedByJournal\":true,\"isAuthorSuppliedPdf\":false,\"isDeskRejected\":\"\",\"isHiddenFromSearch\":false,\"isInQc\":false,\"isInWorkflow\":false,\"isPdf\":false,\"isPdfUpToDate\":true,\"isWithdrawnOrRetracted\":false,\"journal\":{\"display\":true,\"email\":\"info@researchsquare.com\",\"identity\":\"child-psychiatry-and-human-development\",\"isNatureJournal\":false,\"hasQc\":true,\"allowDirectSubmit\":false,\"externalIdentity\":\"chud\",\"sideBox\":\"Learn more about [Child Psychiatry \\u0026 Human Development](http://link.springer.com/journal/10578)\",\"snPcode\":\"10578\",\"submissionUrl\":\"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/10578/3\",\"title\":\"Child Psychiatry \\u0026 Human Development\",\"twitterHandle\":\"\",\"acdcEnabled\":true,\"dfaEnabled\":true,\"editorialSystem\":\"em\",\"reportingPortfolio\":\"Springer Hybrid\",\"inReviewEnabled\":true,\"inReviewRevisionsEnabled\":false},\"keywords\":\"Parental companionship, Attention, Cognitive development, Academic performance, Elementary school students\",\"lastPublishedDoi\":\"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6324909/v1\",\"lastPublishedDoiUrl\":\"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6324909/v1\",\"license\":{\"name\":\"CC BY 4.0\",\"url\":\"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/\"},\"manuscriptAbstract\":\"\\u003cp\\u003eParental companionship plays a crucial role in children's development, yet its specific impact on children's attention remains not well understood. This study investigated how parental companionship influences children\\u0026rsquo;s attention and academic achievement through two studies. Study 1 (questionnaire) revealed that positive parental companionship (communication and interaction, accompanying) enhanced attention and academic performance, while parental interference had negative effects. Attention fully mediated the effects of accompanying and interference on academic performance and partially mediated communication and interaction\\u0026rsquo;s impact. Study 2(Attention Network Test) found that children with low parental companionship exhibited higher alerting effects and marginally lower orienting effects compared to high companionship groups, with no differences in executive control. These results demonstrate that effective parental companionship enhances students' attention functions through multiple pathways, ultimately contributing to improved academic achievement. This research advances theoretical understanding of how family context shapes children's cognitive development through attentional processes.\\u003c/p\\u003e\",\"manuscriptTitle\":\"Parental Companionship Shapes Children's Attentional Functions and Academic Achievement\",\"msid\":\"\",\"msnumber\":\"\",\"nonDraftVersions\":[{\"code\":1,\"date\":\"2025-05-07 03:32:24\",\"doi\":\"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6324909/v1\",\"editorialEvents\":[{\"type\":\"communityComments\",\"content\":0},{\"type\":\"decision\",\"content\":\"Revision requested\",\"date\":\"2025-06-11T18:42:25+00:00\",\"index\":\"\",\"fulltext\":\"\"},{\"type\":\"editorInvitedReview\",\"content\":\"\",\"date\":\"2025-06-10T13:32:31+00:00\",\"index\":\"hide\",\"fulltext\":\"\"},{\"type\":\"reviewerAgreed\",\"content\":\"224800690065834503525934180009298207881\",\"date\":\"2025-04-25T08:06:51+00:00\",\"index\":\"hide\",\"fulltext\":\"\"},{\"type\":\"reviewersInvited\",\"content\":\"\",\"date\":\"2025-04-24T19:19:36+00:00\",\"index\":\"\",\"fulltext\":\"\"},{\"type\":\"editorAssigned\",\"content\":\"\",\"date\":\"2025-04-12T11:55:56+00:00\",\"index\":\"\",\"fulltext\":\"\"},{\"type\":\"checksComplete\",\"content\":\"\",\"date\":\"2025-03-29T01:10:03+00:00\",\"index\":\"\",\"fulltext\":\"\"},{\"type\":\"submitted\",\"content\":\"Child Psychiatry \\u0026 Human Development\",\"date\":\"2025-03-28T04:56:19+00:00\",\"index\":\"\",\"fulltext\":\"\"}],\"status\":\"published\",\"journal\":{\"display\":true,\"email\":\"info@researchsquare.com\",\"identity\":\"child-psychiatry-and-human-development\",\"isNatureJournal\":false,\"hasQc\":true,\"allowDirectSubmit\":false,\"externalIdentity\":\"chud\",\"sideBox\":\"Learn more about [Child Psychiatry \\u0026 Human Development](http://link.springer.com/journal/10578)\",\"snPcode\":\"10578\",\"submissionUrl\":\"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/10578/3\",\"title\":\"Child Psychiatry \\u0026 Human Development\",\"twitterHandle\":\"\",\"acdcEnabled\":true,\"dfaEnabled\":true,\"editorialSystem\":\"em\",\"reportingPortfolio\":\"Springer Hybrid\",\"inReviewEnabled\":true,\"inReviewRevisionsEnabled\":false}}],\"origin\":\"\",\"ownerIdentity\":\"b3593748-765e-4423-b658-d2745d891db7\",\"owner\":[],\"postedDate\":\"May 7th, 2025\",\"published\":true,\"recentEditorialEvents\":[],\"rejectedJournal\":[],\"revision\":\"\",\"amendment\":\"\",\"status\":\"under-review\",\"subjectAreas\":[],\"tags\":[],\"updatedAt\":\"2026-05-06T21:39:37+00:00\",\"versionOfRecord\":[],\"versionCreatedAt\":\"2025-05-07 03:32:24\",\"video\":\"\",\"vorDoi\":\"\",\"vorDoiUrl\":\"\",\"workflowStages\":[]},\"version\":\"v1\",\"identity\":\"rs-6324909\",\"journalConfig\":\"researchsquare\"},\"__N_SSP\":true},\"page\":\"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]\",\"query\":{\"redirect\":\"/article/rs-6324909\",\"identity\":\"rs-6324909\",\"version\":[\"v1\"]},\"buildId\":\"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd\",\"isFallback\":false,\"isExperimentalCompile\":false,\"dynamicIds\":[84888],\"gssp\":true,\"scriptLoader\":[]}","source_license":"CC-BY-4.0","license_restricted":false}