Brain grey and white matter predictors of verbal ability traits in older age: The Lothian Birth Cohort 1936
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cerebral grey and white matter MRI parameters are related to general intelligence and some specific cognitive abilities. Less is known about how structural brain measures relate specifically to verbal processing abilities. We used multi-modal structural MRI to investigate the grey matter (GM) and white matter (WM) correlates of verbal ability in 556 healthy older adults (mean age = 72.68 years, s.d. = .72 years). Structural equation modelling was used to decompose verbal performance into two latent factors: a storage factor that indexed participants' ability to store representations of verbal knowledge and an executive factor that measured their ability to regulate their access to this information in a flexible and task-appropriate manner. GM volumes and WM fractional anisotropy (FA) for components of the language/semantic network were used as predictors of these verbal ability factors. Volume of the ventral temporal cortices predicted participants' storage scores (β = .12, FDR-adjusted p = .04), consistent with the theory that this region acts as a key substrate of semantic knowledge. This effect was mediated by childhood IQ, suggesting a lifelong association between ventral temporal volume and verbal knowledge, rather than an effect of cognitive decline in later life. Executive ability was predicted by FA fractional anisotropy of the arcuate fasciculus (β = .19, FDR-adjusted p = .001), a major language-related tract implicated in speech production. This result suggests that this tract plays a role in the controlled retrieval of word knowledge during speech. At a more general level, these data highlight a basic distinction between information representation, which relies on the accumulation of tissue in specialised GM regions, and executive control, which depends on long-range WM pathways for efficient communication across distributed cortical networks.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".