Cited by 56Retirement, Disability, and EmploymentAging and Gerontology ResearchDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

Mental retirement and health selection: Analyses from the U.S. Health and Retirement Study

Open access
Clouston, Sean A.P., Denier, Nicole·2017·Social Science & Medicine

Abstract

Background Research has recently suggested that retirement may decrease cognitive engagement, resulting in cognitive aging. Few studies have systematically documented whether or how selectivity into retirement shapes the relationship between retirement and cognitive aging.Methods We draw on data from the Health and Retirement Study (1998-2012) to examine the relationship between cognition and retirement for 18,575 labor force participants. Longitudinal regression discontinuity modeling was used to examine performance and decline in episodic memory. Models differentiated three forms of selection bias: indirect and direct selection as well as reverse causation. To further interrogate the disuse hypothesis, we adjust for confounding from health and socioeconomic sources.Results Results revealed that individuals who retired over the course of the panel were substantially different in terms of health, wealth and cognition when compared to those who remained employed. However, accounting for observed selection biases, significant associations were found linking longer retirement with more rapid cognitive decline.Discussion This study examined respondents who were in the labor force at baseline and transitioned into retirement. Analyses suggested that those who retired over the course of the panel had worse overall functioning, but also experienced more rapid declines after retirement that increased the rate of aging by two-fold, resulting in yearly losses of 3.7% (95% CI = [3.5, 4.0]) of one standard deviation in functioning attributable to retirement. Results are supportive of the view that retirement is associated with more rapid cognitive aging.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.01.019

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Another study found a two-fold increase in episodic memory loss attributable to retirement (n=18,575, mean age 66 years) compared with non-retirees, adjusting for health, age, sex, and wealth.

    “Another study found a two-fold increase in episodic memory loss attributable to retirement (n=18 575, mean age 66 years), compared to non-retirees, adjusting for health, age, sex, and wealth.48”

    From Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2020 report of the Lancet Commission (2020) · cites this paper as [48]

    The Results (Effect Sizes; page unavailable) report that episodic-memory decline was about 2.2 times as fast among retirees as among non-retirees. The Data section gives a sample of 18,575, and the Methods and Results describe adjustment for age, sex, health, and socioeconomic factors. But the reported mean age of 66.3 years is the age at retirement, not a stated mean age for the full sample; the two-fold figure describes the yearly rate of decline, not total memory loss. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Hedges LV Olkin I 2014 Statistical method for meta-analysis Academic press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Clouston, S. A. P., & Denier, N.
Affiliations
  • Stony Brook University (US)
  • Colby College (US)
Corresponding author
Clouston, Sean A.P.
Venue
Social Science & Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-04
Volume
178
Pages
78-86
ISSN
0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2582662467
Cited by
56
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
13.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Social Science & Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (U01 AG009740, P01 AG043362)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Retirement, Disability, and Employment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
retirement, cognitive aging, cognitive decline, episodic memory, selection bias, cognitive engagement, reverse causality, older workers, health and retirement
MeSH terms
Aging, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Retirement, Cognitive Dysfunction

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