The Effect of Aging on the Neural Correlates of Phonological Word Retrieval
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Age has a differential effect on cognition, with word retrieval being one of the cognitive domains most affected by aging. This study examined the functional and structural neural correlates of phonological word retrieval in younger and older adults using word and picture rhyme judgment tasks. Although the behavioral performance in the fMRI task was similar for the two age groups, the older adults had increased activation in the right pars triangularis across tasks and in the right pars orbitalis for the word task only. Increased activation together with preserved performance in the older participants would suggest that increased activation was related to compensatory processing. We validated this hypothesis by showing that right pars triangularis activation during correct rhyme judgments was highest in participants who made overall more errors, therefore being most error-prone. Our findings demonstrate that the effect of aging differ in adjacent but distinct right inferior frontal regions. The differential effect of age on word and picture tasks also provides new clues to the level of processing that is most affected by age in speech production tasks. Specifically, we suggest that right inferior frontal activation in older participants is needed to inhibit errors.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".