Psychometric Evidence of Digital and Online Executive Function Tests: A Systematic Review

Objective This review maps psychometric evidence from the past decade on digital and online tools assessing executive functions (EF) in healthy adults. It focuses on six modern domains of validity: content, structure, external, response processes, consequences, and reliability. Methods Searches were conducted across PsycNet, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Virtual Health Library, guided by PRISMA. Core terms included executive functions, digital tools, healthy adults, and psychometric properties. Risk of bias was systematically evaluated. Results Thirty-one studies met inclusion criteria, encompassing 11,246 participants. Most tools assessed core EF domains—working memory, inhibition, and cognitive flexibility—through performance-based tasks or online questionnaires. Reliability was reported in 23 studies, though often via single indices. Content validity appeared in 26 studies but lacked methodological rigor. Structural and external validity were reported in 8 and 17 studies, respectively. Response process evidence (n = 22) and consequential validity (n = 31) were frequently cited but rarely examined in depth. No study addressed all six domains comprehensively. The risk of bias was low for administration but high for sampling. Applicability concerns included unrepresentative samples and weak construct alignment. Conclusion While the field is expanding, it lacks methodological depth. Despite growing interest in digital EF tools, essential domains—particularly structural modeling and consequence analysis—remain underdeveloped. This review underscores the need for comprehensive validation frameworks that integrate theoretical coherence, empirical rigor, and equity-based implementation.