Late onset of age-related difference in unpaced tapping with no age-related difference in phase-shift error detection and correction.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An age-related difference in accuracy and variability of unpaced timing tasks suggests that the internal clock for the processing of intervals of hundreds of milliseconds slows down with age. However, we recently found that sensorimotor synchronization (SMS) error detection and correction abilities are preserved into the ninth and tenth decades, although fastest tapping rate decreases (Turgeon, Wing, & Taylor, 2011). Further testing with the same sample of participants in the present study provides evidence for slowing of the internal clock with age. We report an age-related decrease in spontaneous motor tempo (SMT), an age-related increase in produced period when estimating target durations of 500 ms and 1000 ms, and an age-related increase in "clock variance" in continuing tapping intervals ranging from 300 ms to 900 ms. The profile of age-related difference across the 2 studies suggests a late onset, starting in the ninth decade, of clock slowing without age-related difference in timing error monitoring. The finding that unpaced timing is affected by age, whereas paced timing involved in SMS is not, suggests separate underlying mechanisms for internally generated intervals and monitoring of external timing 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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".