Age-related Changes in Ongoing Thought Relate to External Context and Individual Cognition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Understanding how age-related changes in cognition manifest in the real world is an important goal for aging research. One means of capturing these changes involves “experience sampling” participant’s self-reported thoughts as they go about their daily lives. Previous research using this method has shown age-related changes in ongoing thought: e.g., older adults have fewer thoughts unrelated to the here-and-now. However, it is currently unclear how these changes reflect cognitive aging or lifestyle changes. 78 younger adults and 35 older adults rated their thought contents along 20 dimensions and the difficulty of their current activity in their daily lives. They also performed cognitive tasks in the laboratory. In a set of exploratory analyses using Principal Component Analysis (PCA), we found that older adults spent more time thinking positive, wanted thoughts, particularly in demanding contexts, suggesting they may use different strategies to regulate their emotions. In line with previous research, older adults spent less time mind wandering about their future selves. Past-related thought related to episodic memory differently in older and younger adults. Additionally, PCA analyses performed separately in older and younger adults showed high similarity to an analysis performed on the combined sample, suggesting a similar structure to ongoing daily life thought in older and younger adults. These findings inform the use of experience sampling to understand cognitive aging, highlighting the need to consider content along multiple dimensions as well as the context in which thoughts are reported when analyzing aging ongoing thought.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".