Association Between Executive Functions, Working Memory, and Manual Dexterity in Young and Healthy Older Adults
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aging is accompanied by declines in cognitive and sensorimotor functions. However, at present, the interrelation between attentional processes and dexterity in aging has not been thoroughly addressed. This study explored the relationship between executive function, working memory, and dexterity performance in 15 young and 15 healthy elderly, right-handed participants. A modified version of the Purdue Pegboard Test was used for dexterity assessment. Two subtasks were selected to calculate temporal and kinematic parameters of reaching, grasping, transport, and insertion of pegs. Evaluation of executive function and working memory was performed using neuropsychological tests. The relationship between dexterity and cognitive outcomes were also examined. Results showed that the prehensile movements involved in grasping and their speed significantly differed between groups and correlated with executive function in the young group. For elderly adults, variability of hand movements turned out to be associated with executive abilities.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it