WAIS Information Subtest as an indicator of crystallized cognitive abilities and brain reserve among highly educated older adults: A three-year longitudinal study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Third Edition (WAIS-III) Information Subtest (IS) is known as a neuropsychological “Hold” test that is relatively resistant to decline with aging. We administered neuropsychological tests among highly educated healthy older adults once a year for three subsequent years. Results showed highly stable performances on the IS across years (Mean Z score: T0 = 1.39, SD = 0.60; T1 = 1.37, SD = 0.77; T2 = 1.50, SD = 0.66; T3 = 1.48, SD = 0.66), that were significantly higher than zero (T0: t = 12.08; T1: t = 9.29; T2: t = 11.71; T3: t = 11.68; for all, p < 0.0001). In contrast, other neuropsychological tests showed differences in performance across time; some performances significantly declined (Rey Osterrieth Complex Figure test-copy, Rey-Auditory Verbal Learning Test, and Montreal Cognitive Assessment test [MoCA]), whereas others were improved, possibly due to practice effects (Rey Osterrieth Complex Figure test- delayed, Rey-Auditory Verbal Learning Test- delayed, and Trail Making Test- part A). Correlation with whole brain volumetric analysis revealed a positive correlation between gray matter volumes and IS scores (r = 0.46, p < 0.05) even when controlling for age and education (partial correlations: r = 0.43; r = 0.45, for both p < 0.05). No significant correlations were found between gray matter and other test scores. Therefore, the WAIS-III Information subtest appears to be an adequate neuropsychological measurement of crystallized ability in highly educated older adults and may be considered as a proxy measure of brain reserve.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".