Aging and Response Inhibition: Normative Data for the Victoria Stroop Test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increased difficulty with response inhibition occurs with age, although there is some controversy as to whether increased interference on Stroop tasks reflects difficulties with response inhibition or simply reflects generalized cognitive slowing. The Victoria Stroop Test (VST) is a brief, easily administered, psychometrically sound version of Stroop's original task. Performance on the VST by adults across a wide age span was examined to determine the association between age and various measures of interference. In addition, normative data for the VST were calculated. Participants were 272 healthy, community-dwelling adults age 18 to 94. Age and speed were negatively correlated on all trials of the VST. Importantly, however, interference scores that were corrected for baseline slowing remained highly correlated with age. Similarly, age and error scores on the interference trial were positively correlated, indicating decreased accuracy with age. These findings suggest that increased interference on Stroop tasks with age is not accounted for by simple cognitive slowing and more likely reflects other cognitive changes, such as decreased response inhibition. The VST has a number of administrative and psychometric strengths, and the provision of normative data should enhance its potential for clinical and research applications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".