Cited by 55Cognitive Abilities and TestingMemory Processes and InfluencesCognitive Functions and Memory

Flynn effects on sub-factors of episodic and semantic memory: Parallel gains over time and the same set of determining factors

Rönnlund, Michael, Nilsson, Lars-Göran·2009·Neuropsychologia

Abstract

The study examined the extent to which time-related gains in cognitive performance, so-called Flynn effects, generalize across sub-factors of episodic memory (recall and recognition) and semantic memory (knowledge and fluency). We conducted time-sequential analyses of data drawn from the Betula prospective cohort study, involving four age-matched samples (35-80 years; N=2996) tested on the same battery of memory tasks on either of four occasions (1989, 1995, 1999, and 2004). The results demonstrate substantial time-related improvements on recall and recognition as well as on fluency and knowledge, with a trend of larger gains on semantic as compared with episodic memory [Rönnlund, M., & Nilsson, L. -G. (2008). The magnitude, generality, and determinants of Flynn effects on forms of declarative memory: Time-sequential analyses of data from a Swedish cohort study. Intelligence], but highly similar gains across the sub-factors. Finally, the association with markers of environmental change was similar, with evidence that historical increases in quantity of schooling was a main driving force behind the gains, both on the episodic and semantic sub-factors. The results obtained are discussed in terms of brain regions involved.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.11.007

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?

  • Cross-sectional research has indicated no difference in the Flynn effect among adult cohorts ranging in age from 35-80 years.

    “Cross-sectional research has indicated no difference among young children, older children, and adults (Flynn, 1984b) and no difference among adult cohorts ranging in age from 35–80 years (Ronnlund & Nilsson, 2008).”

    From The Flynn effect: A meta-analysis. (2014) · cites this paper as Ronnlund & Nilsson, 2008

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rönnlund, M., & Nilsson, L.-G.
Affiliations
  • Umeå University (SE)
  • Stockholm University (SE)
Corresponding author
Rönnlund, Michael
Venue
Neuropsychologia
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-09
Volume
47
Issue
11
Pages
2174-2180
ISSN
0028-3932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2122398581
Cited by
55
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuropsychologia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
Flynn effect, episodic memory, semantic memory, memory retrieval, recognition memory, semantic fluency, semantic knowledge, cognitive aging, educational attainment, environmental change, declarative memory
MeSH terms
Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cognition, Female, Humans, Male, Memory, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Regression Analysis, Retrospective Studies, Semantics, Time Factors, Vocabulary, Cohort Studies, Case-Control Studies, Knowledge

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