CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 209Cognitive Abilities and TestingAging and Gerontology ResearchNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Age differences in fluid intelligence: contributions of general slowing and frontal decline

Bugg, Julie M., Zook, Nancy A., DeLosh, Edward L., Davalos, Deana B., Davis, Hasker P.·2006·Brain and Cognition
DOI 10.1016/j.bandc.2006.02.006
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The current study examined the contributions of general slowing and frontal decline to age differences in fluid intelligence. Participants aged 20-89 years completed Block Design, Matrix Reasoning, simple reaction time, choice reaction time, Wisconsin Card Sorting, and Tower of London tasks. Age-related declines in fluid intelligence, speed of processing, and frontal function were observed. Hierarchical regression analyses showed that the processing speed and frontal function measures accounted for significant variance in fluid intelligence performance, but there was also a residual effect of age after controlling for each variable individually as well as both variables. An additional analysis showed that the variance in fluid intelligence that was attributable to processing speed was not fully shared with the variance attributable to frontal function. These findings suggest that the age-related decline in fluid intelligence is due to general slowing and frontal decline, as well as other unidentified factors.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bandc.2006.02.006

Cites

50 of 50 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?

  • Aging increased both inter-subject standard deviations and intrasubject (trial-to-trial) standard deviations.

    “In accord with previous studies, we found that aging increased both inter-subject standard deviations (Bugg et al., 2006; Vincent et al., 2012) and intrasubject (trial-to-trial) standard deviations (Deary and Der, 2005; Reimers and Maylor, 2006).”

    From Age-related slowing of response selection and production in a visual choice reaction time task (2015) · cites this paper as Bugg et al., 2006

  • Previous studies have found significant age-related slowing of visual CRT latencies across a variety of paradigms.

    “Previous studies have found significant age-related slowing of visual CRT latencies in a variety of experiments, including paradigms with two stimuli and two response buttons (Bugg et al., 2006; Feeney et al., 2013), paradigms with four stimuli and two response buttons, and paradigms with four stimuli and four response buttons (Deary et al., 2011).”

    From Age-related slowing of response selection and production in a visual choice reaction time task (2015) · cites this paper as Bugg et al., 2006

  • Cognitive slowing cannot fully account for age-related cognitive decline.

    “However, it has been argued that cognitive slowing cannot fully account for age-related cognitive decline (Bugg et al., 2006; Salthouse, 1991; Schaie, 1989).”

    From Reducing working memory load in spoken dialogue systems (2009) · cites this paper as Bugg et al., 2006

  • Mean SRT latencies reported in recent studies vary widely, ranging from 233 ms to nearly 400 ms.

    “However, mean SRT latencies reported in recent studies vary widely (Table 1), ranging from 233 ms (Krieg et al., 2001; Vincent et al., 2012) to nearly 400 ms (Bugg et al., 2006).”

    From Factors influencing the latency of simple reaction time (2015) · cites this paper as Bugg et al., 2006

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Bugg, J. M., Zook, N. A., DeLosh, E. L., Davalos, D. B., & Davis, H. P.
Affiliations
  • Colorado State University (US)
  • Purchase College (US)
  • University of Colorado Colorado Springs (US)
Corresponding author
Bugg, Julie M.
ORCID
Venue
Brain and Cognition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-10
Volume
62
Issue
1
Pages
9-16
ISSN
0278-2626 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.bandc.2006.02.006
OpenAlex
W2130178897
Cited by
209
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 13
FWCI
6.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Brain and Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
fluid intelligence, age differences, processing speed, cognitive aging, reaction time, executive function
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Female, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Intelligence, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Middle Aged, Problem Solving, Reaction Time, Reference Values, Regression Analysis

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