Cited by 731Cognitive Abilities and TestingCognitive Functions and MemoryNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

A theoretical framework for the study of adult cognitive plasticity

Open access
Lövdén, Martin, Bäckman, Lars, Lindenberger, Ulman, Schaefer, Sabine, Schmiedek, Florian·2010·Psychological Bulletin

Abstract

Does plasticity contribute to adult cognitive development, and if so, in what ways? The vague and overused concept of plasticity makes these controversial questions difficult to answer. In this article, we refine the notion of adult cognitive plasticity and sharpen its conceptual distinctiveness. According to our framework, adult cognitive plasticity is driven by a prolonged mismatch between functional organismic supplies and environmental demands and denotes the brain's capacity for anatomically implementing reactive changes in behavioral flexibility (i.e., the possible range of performance and function). We distinguish between 2 interconnected but distinct cognitive outcomes of adult cognitive plasticity: alterations in processing efficiency and alterations in representations. We demonstrate the usefulness of our framework in evaluating and interpreting (a) increments in frontal brain activations in the course of normal aging and (b) the effects of cognitive training in adulthood and old age. Finally, we outline new research questions and predictions generated by the present framework and recommend design features for future cognitive-training studies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0020080

Cites

202 of 202 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lövdén, M., Bäckman, L., Lindenberger, U., Schaefer, S., & Schmiedek, F.
Affiliations
  • Lund University (SE)
  • Max Planck Society (DE)
Venue
Psychological Bulletin
Published
2010
Volume
136
Issue
4
Pages
659-676
ISSN
  • 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1455
OpenAlex
W1984090792
Cited by
731
References
202
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 47 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 64 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 59 · 2017: 53 · 2016: 55 · 2015: 46 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 43 · 2012: 34
FWCI
45.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • German Federal Ministry for Education and Research
  • Max Planck Society
  • Swedish Research Council (DNR 421-2005-2018)
  • Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research
  • Swedish Brain Power
  • Alexander Von Humboldt Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
cognitive development, behavioral flexibility, processing efficiency, mental representation, frontal lobe activation, normal aging, cognitive training, theoretical framework
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aging, Brain, Brain Mapping, Cognition, Humans, Memory, Middle Aged, Neuronal Plasticity

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