Cited by 66Aging and Gerontology ResearchCognitive Functions and MemoryDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

What goods can self‐assessment questionnaires deliver for cognitive gerontology?

Rabbitt, Patrick, Maylor, Elizabeth, McInnes, Lynn, Bent, Nuala, Moore, Belinda·1995·Applied Cognitive Psychology

Abstract

Donald Broadbent's work in developing and validating his Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) incidentally contributed to our understanding of what self‐assessment questionnaires (SAQs) can tell us about the nature of cognitive changes that occur in old age, and their effects on people's everyday lives. The literature on use of SAQs in age comparisons is reviewed in the context of this work, as is new empirical evidence that older people complain of general loss of memory efficiency but, paradoxically, report fewer lapses than young adults on the CFQ and other SAQs. These new data provide a basis for discussion of the reliability and consistency of SAQs and of their validity as tools to explore a wide range of changes associated with cognitive ageing: objective changes in cognitive ability and in objective functional competence; changes in people's understanding of their own cognitive processes, in their knowledge of cognitive and mnemonic strategies, and in their abilities to make use of these strategies; the extent to which responses given by older and younger adults reflect emotional and personality variables such as depression, anxiety, neuroticism, extraversion, and perceived locus of control. Self‐reports by elderly adults on the CFQ, and other SAQs, simultaneously provide so many different kinds of information about the changes they experience, and about their attitudes and adaptations to old age, that apparently straightforward analyses give misleading answers. Methodological precautions are suggested for determining which questions can, and are, being asked and which analyses may, and which cannot, answer them.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/acp.2350090709

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Individuals with higher cognitive abilities may use more conservative standards when judging the cognitive demands of their daily activities than individuals with lower cognitive abilities.

    “For instance, individuals with higher cognitive abilities may use more conservative standards when judging the cognitive demands of their daily activities than might individuals with lower cognitive abilities (see Rabbitt, Maylor, McInnes, Bent, & Moore, 1995).”

    From Enrichment Effects on Adult Cognitive Development: Can the Functional Capacity of Older Adults Be Preserved and Enhanced? (2008) · cites this paper as Rabbitt, Maylor, McInnes, Bent, & Moore, 1995

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rabbitt, P., Maylor, E., McInnes, L., Bent, N., & Moore, B.
Affiliations
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • Newcastle University (GB)
Venue
Applied Cognitive Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1995-01
Volume
9
Issue
7
ISSN
  • 0888-4080 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-0720
OpenAlex
W2009938227
Cited by
66
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2
FWCI
3.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Applied Cognitive Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
self-assessment questionnaire, Cognitive Failures Questionnaire, cognitive aging, older adults, memory efficiency, cognitive failure, age differences, questionnaire validity, reliability statistics, cognitive strategies, locus of control, anxiety and depression, daily functioning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review