Educational level and task performance influence on lexical access lateralization changes in healthy aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hemispheric asymmetry reduction in older adults (HAROLD) model has claimed that older adults tend to display less lateralized brain activation patterns with respect to younger ones during memory, language, and naming tasks, but only a few times have these patterns been explored within older population. Furthermore, it is unclear if this phenomenon is a compensation response or an adaptive pattern that is not helping cognitive functions. Literature has assumed that education level (EL) could be critical, to explain such patterns. We aimed to control this as a variable by comparing neural correlates with an functional magnetic resonance imaging picture naming task in literate, healthy older adults with high and low EL. Our results showed that EL is not a determinant factor for activation of neural pattern reorganization prognosis. It was found that performance is a more reliable variable to observe neural pattern reorganization in the elderly. This study supports the de-differentiation hypothesis of HAROLD model because there is no reduction in lateralization of some highly-specialized structures in persons who maintained optimal lexical access, in contrast to those who had low scores in naming task.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".