New Evidence of Healthier Aging: Positive Cohort Effects on Verbal Fluency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Cross-sectional studies have shown improvements in cognition in later-born cohorts. However, it remains unclear whether these cohort effects extend beyond cognitive levels and are also detectable in the rate of age-related cognitive decline. Additionally, evidence is scarce on the presence and consistency of cohort effects throughout different segments of the distribution of cognitive trajectories. Research Design and Methods: This study evaluates the existence and variability of cohort effects across the entire distribution of aging-related trajectories of verbal fluency. With this purpose, we develop sex and education-adjusted longitudinal norms of verbal fluency using data from 9 waves of the English Longitudinal Study of Aging (ELSA) by fitting quantile mixed models. The effect of age was modeled using splines to assess birth cohort effects, after grouping individuals in 5-year groups from 1920 to 1950 according to their age at study entry. To test for possible cohort effects across the 10th, 50th, and 90th quantiles, the coefficients associated with the splines were allowed to vary among cohorts. Results: < .001), supporting the hypothesis of cohort effects. Additionally, we also found that quantiles of verbal fluency at any age are shifted upwards in later-born cohorts compared to those in earlier-born cohorts. Discussion and Implications: These results enhance our understanding of cognitive decline in older adults by demonstrating that cohort effects on cognition are observable both cross-sectionally and longitudinally, affecting the entire range of verbal fluency trajectories.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".