Therefore, by extension, maintaining adept cognitive function should result in the maintenance of functional abilities. The underlying premise is that functional decline, at least in part, is the result of age-related cognitive decline. Ultimately, the goal of cognitive training is to enhance or sustain cognitive abilities at healthy levels for longer portions of the life span in the hope that everyday functioning will benefit. These studies have also demonstrated that cognitive training is very specific to the ability trained, with very little transfer of training to untrained cognitive domains and improvements have been limited to tasks very similar to the training itself ( Kramer & Willis, 2002 Neely & Bäckman, 1995 Willis et al., 1981 Willis & Schaie, 1994). Baltes & Willis, 1982 Caprio-Prevette & Fry, 1996 Hayslip et al., 1995 Kramer, Larish, & Strayer, 1995 Mohs et al., 1998 Neely & Bäckman, 1995 Oswald, Rupprecht, Gunzelmann, & Tritt, 1996 Willis et al., 1992 Willis & Schaie, 1994). Baltes, Kuhl, Gutzmann, & Sowarka, 1995 P. This research has established that older adults can improve cognitive abilities ( Ball & Sekuler, 1986 Ball, Beard, Roenker, Miller, & Griggs, 1988 Hayslip, Maloy, & Kohl, 1995 Schaie & Willis, 1986 Willis, Bliezner, & Baltes, 1981) with training protocols targeting memory, reasoning, and speed of processing, among other cognitive domains ( Ball et al., 2002 Ball et al., 1988 M. Therefore a great deal of research has gone into pursuing the question of whether cognitive decline can be reversed or delayed through cognitive training. More recently, Burdick and colleagues (2005) confirmed that cognition is a significant predictor of older adults' difficulties with basic and instrumental activities of daily living, which lead to loss of independence.Ĭonsidering both the impact of cognitive decline upon everyday abilities, and the importance of everyday abilities to sustained independence, there is increasing interest in helping older adults maintain cognitive fitness for as long as possible. For example, Bäckman and Hill (1996) concluded that laboratory-based measures of cognitive abilities can reliably predict functional competence among older adults. These findings are especially important considering the established links between basic cognitive abilities and everyday functional abilities ( Allaire & Marsiske, 1999 Cahn-Weiner, Malloy, Boyle, Marran, & Salloway, 2000 Owsley, Sloane, McGwin, & Ball, 2002 Willis, Jay, Diehl, & Marsiske, 1992). Itasca, IL: Riverside.RESEARCHERS have well established that a variety of cognitive abilities, including memory, processing speed, and problem solving, decline with increasing age (for examples see Birren, Woods, & Williams, 1980 Madden, 1992 Schaie, 1996 Smith & Earles, 1996). Woodcock-Johnson III tests of achievement. Woodcock-Johnson III tests of cognitive ability. Woodcock-Johnson psycho-educational battery – revised. Woodcock (Eds.), Human cognitive abilities in theory and practice (pp. CHC theory and the human cognitive abilities project: Standing on the shoulders of the giants of psychometric intelligence research. Auditory and visual factors of intelligence. ![]() Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Linn (Ed.), Intelligence: Measurement, theory and public policy (pp. Cattell (Eds.), Handbook of multivariate psychology (2nd ed., pp. ![]() Wolman (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence: Theories, measurements, and applications (pp. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. ![]() Personality: A systematic theoretical and factoral study. Psychological Bulletin, 40, 153–193.Ĭattell, R. Psychological Bulletin, 38, 592.Ĭattell, R. Some theoretical issues in adult intelligence testing. New York: Cambridge University Press.Ĭattell, R. Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor analytic studies.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |