MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110062480 · doi:10.1037/a0033316

Longitudinal mediation of processing speed on age-related change in memory and fluid intelligence.

2013· article· en· W2110062480 on OpenAlexaff
Annie Robitaille, Andrea M. Piccinin, Graciela Muñiz‐Terrera, Lesa Hoffman, Boo Johansson, D.J.H. Deeg, Marja Aartsen, Hannie C. Comijs, Scott M. Hofer

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology and Aging · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive Abilities and Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute on AgingKnut och Alice Wallenbergs StiftelseStiftelserna Wilhelm och Martina LundgrensForskningsrådet för Arbetsliv och SocialvetenskapStiftelsen Handlanden Hjalmar SvenssonsWenner-Gren Stiftelserna
KeywordsPsychologyMediationLongitudinal studyCognitionDevelopmental psychologyCognitive agingTwin studyModerated mediationCognitive psychologySocial psychologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Age-related decline in processing speed has long been considered a key driver of cognitive aging. While the majority of empirical evidence for the processing speed hypothesis has been obtained from analyses of between-person age differences, longitudinal studies provide a direct test of within-person change. Using recent developments in longitudinal mediation analysis, we examine the speed-mediation hypothesis at both the within-and between-person levels in two longitudinal studies, Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (LASA) and Origins of Variance in the Oldest-Old (OCTO-Twin). We found significant within-person indirect effects of change in age, such that increasing age was related to lower speed, which in turn relates to lower performance across repeated measures on other cognitive outcomes. Although between-person indirect effects were also significant in LASA, they were not in OCTO-Twin which is not unexpected given the age homogeneous nature of the OCTO-Twin data. A more in-depth examination through measures of effect size suggests that, for the LASA study, the within-person indirect effects were small and between-person indirect effects were consistently larger. These differing magnitudes of direct and indirect effects across levels demonstrate the importance of separating between- and within-person effects in evaluating theoretical models of age-related change.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology and AgingSame topicCognitive Abilities and TestingFrench-language works237,207