Abstract
In the past decade, there has emerged a vast research literature dealing with attempts to harness brain plasticity in older adults, with a view to improving cognitive function. Since cognitive training (CT) has shown restricted utility in this regard, attention has increasingly turned to interventions that use adjunct procedures such as motor training or physical activity (PA). As evidence builds that these have some efficacy, it becomes necessary to ensure that the outcome measures being used to infer causal influence upon cognitive function are subjected to appropriate critical appraisal. It has been highlighted previously that the choice of specific tasks used to demonstrate transfer to the cognitive domain is of critical importance. In the context of most intervention studies, standardized tests and batteries of cognitive function are de rigueur. The argument presented here is that the latent constructs to which these tests relate are not usually subject to a sufficient level of analytic scrutiny. We present the historical origins of some exemplar tests, and give particular consideration to the limits on explanatory scope that are implied by their composition and the nature of their deployment. In addition to surveying the validity of these tests when used to appraise intervention-related changes in cognitive function, we also consider their neurophysiological correlates. In particular, we argue that the broadly distributed brain activity associated with the performance of many tests of cognitive function, extending to the classical motor networks, permits the impact of interventions based on motor training or PA to be better understood.
Highlights
A compelling body of evidence indicates that the aging brain’s structure and function can be altered by factors amenable to intervention in later life, such as physical activity (PA) and social enhancement
While reductions in completion times have been reported for individual task variants (TMT-A or Trail Making Test (TMT)-B), it is not possible to exclude the possibility that these are attributable to changes in some aspects of motor function arising from the particular mode of intervention
The point is that an improvement in the performance of a test arising from therapeutic intervention does not entail that the change may be interpreted in terms of the particular facet of cognition assigned by the practitioner to the test
Summary
A compelling body of evidence indicates that the aging brain’s structure and function can be altered by factors amenable to intervention in later life, such as physical activity (PA) and social enhancement (for review see Ballesteros et al, 2015). The research literature documents a multitude of attempts to harness the brain’s capability for adaptive reorganization and change i.e., ‘‘neuroplasticity’’ The majority of these endeavors aim to improve ‘‘cognition’’. With respect to many of the tests that are employed to evaluate interventions to improve cognition, ecological validity is bound by the limits on explanatory scope that are implied by their composition (as distinct from their customary interpretation). This limitation notwithstanding, with the widespread availability of neuroimaging, it is further becoming apparent that the neurophysiological correlates of test performance are frequently at odds with those that are assumed by their adherents. Beyond highlighting the challenges posed by these considerations, we examine how they permit the seemingly positive impact of some forms of PA upon tests of cognitive function to be better understood
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
