Cited by 312Cognitive Functions and MemoryNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAging and Gerontology Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Training effects on dual-task performance: Are there age-related differences in plasticity of attentional control?

Abstract

A number of studies have suggested that attentional control skills required to perform 2 tasks concurrently become impaired with age (A. A. Hartley, 1992; J. M. McDowd & R. J. Shaw, 2000). A. A. Hartley (2001) recently observed that the age-related differences in dual-task performance were larger when the 2 tasks required similar motor responses. The present study examined the extent to which age-related deficits in dual-task performance or time sharing--in particular, dual-task performance of 2 discrimination tasks with similar motor requirements--can be moderated by training. The results indicate that, even when the 2 tasks required similar motor responses, both older and younger adults could learn to perform the tasks faster and more accurately. Moreover, the improvement in performance generalized to new task combinations involving new stimuli. Therefore, it appears that training can substantially improve dual-task processing skills in older adults.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0882-7974.20.4.695

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. 10.1037/0096-3445.129.3.308 · DOI
  2. Hartley, 1992, Attention., 3
  3. Kramer, 1996, Training for attentional control in dual-task settings., 83
  4. Madden, 2001, Speed and timing of behavioral processes., 288
  5. 1997, Advanced statistics 7.5

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 312

Metadata

Authors
Bherer, L., Kramer, A. F., Peterson, M. S., Colcombe, S., Erickson, K., & Becic, E.
Affiliations
  • Université du Québec à Montréal (CA)
  • University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
  • George Mason University (US)
Venue
Psychology and Aging
Published
2005-12
Volume
20
Issue
4
Pages
695-709
ISSN
  • 0882-7974 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1498
OpenAlex
W2158487083
Cited by
312
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 27
FWCI
12.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychology and Aging (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (R01AG025032, R01AG25032, AG25667)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
Keywords
dual-task performance, attentional control, aging, cognitive training, time-sharing, older adults, discrimination task, transfer of training, cognitive plasticity
MeSH terms
Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Aging, Attention, Brain, Cognition Disorders, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Neuronal Plasticity, Neuropsychological Tests, Reaction Time

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