Testing-the-Limits and the Study of Adult Age Differences in Cognitive Plasticity of a Mnemonic Skill

R. Kliegl, Jacqui Smith, P. Baltes
{"title":"Testing-the-Limits and the Study of Adult Age Differences in Cognitive Plasticity of a Mnemonic Skill","authors":"R. Kliegl, Jacqui Smith, P. Baltes","doi":"10.1037/0012-1649.25.2.247","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Investigated the range and limits of cognitive reserve capacity as a general approach to the under- standing of age differences in cognitive functioning. Testing-the-limits is proposed as a research strategy. Data are reported from 2 training studies involving old (65 to 83 years old) and young adults (19 to 29 years old). The training, designed to engineer an expertise in serial word recall, involved instruction and practice in the Method of Loci. Substantial plasticity was evident in pretest to posttest comparisons. Participants raised their serial word recall several times above that of pretest baseline. Age-differential limits in reserve capacity were evident in amount of training gain but not in responses to conditions of increased test difficulty (speeded stimulus presentation). Group differences were magnified by the training to such a degree that age distributions barely overlapped at posttests. Testing-the-limits offers promise in terms of understanding the extent and nature of cognitive plasticity. Developmental Psychology","PeriodicalId":293042,"journal":{"name":"The Mind Research Repository","volume":"168 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"312","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Mind Research Repository","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.25.2.247","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 312

Abstract

Investigated the range and limits of cognitive reserve capacity as a general approach to the under- standing of age differences in cognitive functioning. Testing-the-limits is proposed as a research strategy. Data are reported from 2 training studies involving old (65 to 83 years old) and young adults (19 to 29 years old). The training, designed to engineer an expertise in serial word recall, involved instruction and practice in the Method of Loci. Substantial plasticity was evident in pretest to posttest comparisons. Participants raised their serial word recall several times above that of pretest baseline. Age-differential limits in reserve capacity were evident in amount of training gain but not in responses to conditions of increased test difficulty (speeded stimulus presentation). Group differences were magnified by the training to such a degree that age distributions barely overlapped at posttests. Testing-the-limits offers promise in terms of understanding the extent and nature of cognitive plasticity. Developmental Psychology
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
记忆技能认知可塑性的极限检验与成人年龄差异研究
研究了认知储备能力的范围和限制,作为理解认知功能年龄差异的一般途径。极限测试是一种研究策略。数据来自两项训练研究,涉及老年人(65至83岁)和年轻人(19至29岁)。该培训旨在培养连续单词记忆方面的专业知识,包括位点法的指导和实践。在测试前和测试后的比较中,实质性的可塑性是明显的。参与者的连续单词记忆能力比测试前的基线提高了几倍。储备能力的年龄差异限制在训练获得量上是明显的,但在增加测试难度(加速刺激呈现)条件下的反应中没有。组间差异被训练放大到这样的程度,以至于年龄分布在测试后几乎没有重叠。测试极限为理解认知可塑性的程度和本质提供了希望。发展心理学
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Superiority in English and German: Cross-language grammatical differences? Measuring foreign accent strength in English : Validating Levenshtein distance as a measure Testing-the-Limits and the Study of Adult Age Differences in Cognitive Plasticity of a Mnemonic Skill How structure-sensitive is the parser? Evidence from Mandarin Chinese Further Testing of Limits of Cognitive Plasticity: Negative Age Differences in a Mnemonic Skill Are Robust
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1