Abstract
Objective: This study considered the potential role of both protective factors (cognitive reserve, CR) and adverse ones (general slowing) in modulating cognitive flexibility in the adult life-span.Method: Ninety-eight individuals performed a task-switching (TS) paradigm in which we adopted a manipulation concerning the timing between the cue and the target. Working memory demands were minimized by using transparent cues. Additionally, indices of cognitive integrity, depression, processing speed and different CR dimensions were collected and used in linear models accounting for TS performance under the different time constraints.Results: The main results showed similar mixing costs and higher switching costs in older adults, with an overall age-dependent effect of general slowing on these costs. The link between processing speed and TS performance was attenuated when participants had more time to prepare. Among the different CR indices, formal education only was associated with reduced switch costs under time pressure.Discussion: Even though CR is often operationalized as a unitary construct, the present research confirms the benefits of using tools designed to distinguish between different CR dimensions. Furthermore, our results provide empirical support to the assumption that processing speed influence on executive performance depends on time constraints. Finally, it is suggested that whether age differences appear in terms of switch or mixing costs depends on working memory demands (which were low in our tasks with transparent cues).
Highlights
Many everyday life situations require cognitive flexibility, namely the capacity to adaptively select between multiple task-sets
Switch cost is measured as the difference between a repeat and a switch trial, both in terms of Response Times (RT) and errors, whereas the mixing cost arises as the difference between a repeat and a single-task trial
Mixing cost in RTs decreased when more time to prepare was given to the participants, as evident from the main effect of cue-to-target interval (CTI) [F(1,90) = 261.57, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.744]
Summary
Many everyday life situations require cognitive flexibility, namely the capacity to adaptively select between multiple task-sets. Many accounts of the phenomenon have been put forward, some referring to mechanisms specific for TS (Kray and Lindenberger, 2000; Mayr, 2001) and others trying to integrate age-related difference across different functions, proposing a unitary account of such aging effects (e.g., Lindenberger and Baltes, 1994; Salthouse, 1996; Li and Lindenberger, 1999; Wasylyshyn et al, 2011): in these models, cognitive decline is mainly attributed to deterioration in an underlying domain, rather than considering single domains as separated entities. They are referred to as “common cause models”
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
