## 3 Results
### Attention Assessment  
After two weeks of digital intervention, the change rate in attention (total CAT score) was significantly different between the experimental group (story-based content group) and the control group (quiz-based content group), with the experimental group showing a change rate of 40.2 \(\pm\) 10.4 and the control group showing 34.0 \(\pm\) 17.2 (\(p\) = 0.038), as shown in Table 2.  
### Attention Assessment  
After two weeks of digital intervention, the change rate in attention (total CAT score) was significantly different between the experimental group (story-based content group) and the control group (quiz-based content group), with the experimental group showing a change rate of 40.2 \(\pm\) 10.4 and the control group showing 34.0 \(\pm\) 17.2 (\(p\) = 0.038), as shown in Table 2. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Experimental Group (N = 20)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Control Group (N = 20)**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\)-Value} \\ \cline{3-6}  & & **Mean or N** & & & & 0.024 \({}^{*}\) \\ \cline{2-6} Gender & Boy & 16 & 80 & 11 & 55 & \\ \cline{2-6}  & Girl & 4 & 20 & 9 & 45 & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{Age} & \multirow{6}{*}{6–7} & \multirow{6}{*}{2} & \multirow{6}{*}{10} & \multirow{6}{*}{2} & \multirow{6}{*}{10} \\ \cline{3-6}  & & & & & & 0.838 \({}^{*}\) \\ \cline{2-6}  & & & & & & \\ \cline{2-6}  & 6–7 & 2 & 10 & 2 & 10 & \\ \cline{2-6}  & 8–9 & 10 & 50 & 12 & 60 & \\ \cline{2-6}  & 10–11 & 4 & 20 & 4 & 20 & \\ \cline{2-6}  & 12–13 & 4 & 20 & 2 & 10 & \\ \cline{2-6}  & & 9.3 & 2.67 & 8.85 & 2.58 & 0.59 \({}^{**}\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{*}\)Chi-squared test and \({}^{**}\) independent \(t\)-test.  
\end{table} 
Table 1: Information on participating children. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Experimental Group (N = 20)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Control Group (N = 20)**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\)-Value} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Effect Size**} \\ \cline{3-6}  & & **Mean** & & & & **SD** & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{ \begin{tabular}{c} Simple \\ selection \\ (auditory) \\ \end{tabular}  } & Baseline & 3.07 & 0.81 & 3.05 & 0.49 & 0.165 \({}^{*}\) & \\ \cline{2-6}  & Four weeks & 3.59 & 0.57 & 3.40 & 0.33 & 0.849 \({}^{*}\) & \\ \cline{2-6}  & \(p\)-value & & 0.024 \({}^{**}\) & & 0.520 \({}^{**}\) & 0.039 \({}^{**}\) & 0.042 \({}^{**}\) \\ \cline{2-6}  & Effect size & & 0.667 \({}^{*}\) & & 0.742 \({}^{*}\) & & \\ \cline{2-6}  & Change rate & \(-\)16.94 & 29.63 & \(-\)11.48 & 32.65 & 0.028 \({}^{*}\) & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{ \begin{tabular}{c} Sustained \\ inhibition \\ \end{tabular}  } & Baseline & 1.10 & 0.58 & 1.78 & 1.27 & 0.097 \({}^{*}\) & \\ \cline{2-6}  & Four weeks & 1.25 & 1.16 & 1.54 & 0.63 & 0.880 \({}^{*}\) & \\ \cline{2-6}  & \(p\)-value & & 0.749 \({}^{**}\) & & 0.410 \({}^{**}\) & 0.146 \({}^{**}\) & 0.025 \({}^{**}\) \\ \cline{2-6}  & Effect size & & 0.269 \({}^{*}\) & & 0.196 \({}^{*}\) & & \\ \cline{2-6}  & Change rate & \(-\)13.64 & –100 & 13.48 & 50.39 & 0.112 \({}^{*}\) & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{ \begin{tabular}{c} Interference \\ selection \\ \end{tabular}  } & Baseline & 2.05 & 1.08 & 2.38 & 0.75 & 0.475 \({}^{*}\) & \\ \cline{2-6}  & Four weeks & 2.31 & 0.54 & 2.46 & 1.02 & 0.514 \({}^{*}\) & \\ \cline{2-6}  & \(p\)-value & & 0.679 \({}^{**}\) & & 0.157 \({}^{**}\) & & 0.040 \({}^{**}\) & 0.009 \({}^{**}\) \\ \cline{2-6}  & Effect size & & 0.250 \({}^{*}\) & & 0.111 \({}^{*}\) & & \\ \cline{2-6}  & Change rate & \(-\)12.68 & 50 & \(-\)3.36 & \(-\)36 & 0.014 \({}^{*}\) & \\ \hline \multirow{6}{*}{\ \begin{tabular}{c} Interference \\ selection \\ \end{tabular}