Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 460

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Walking While Memorizing: Age-Related Differences in Compensatory Behavior

Open access
Li, Karen Z.H., Lindenberger, Ulman, Freund, Alexandra M., Baltes, Paul B.·2001·Psychological Science

Abstract

This study investigated predictions of the life-span theory of selection, optimization, and compensation, focusing on different patterns of task priority during dual-task performance in younger and older adults. Cognitive (memorizing) and sensorimotor (walking a narrow track) performance were measured singly, concurrently, and when task difficulty was manipulated. Use of external aids was measured to provide another index of task priority. Before dual-task testing, participants received extensive training with each component task and external aid. Age differences in dual-task costs were greater in memory performance than in walking, suggesting that older adults prioritized walking over memory. Further, when given a choice of compensatory external aids to use, older adults optimized walking, whereas younger adults optimized memory performance. The results have broad implications for systemic theories of cognitive and sensorimotor aging, and the costs and benefits of assistive devices and environmental support for older populations.

Overview

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 · 10.1111/1467-9280.00341

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Li, K. Z. H., Lindenberger, U., Freund, A. M., & Baltes, P. B.
Venue
Psychological Science
Published
2001-05
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
230-237
ISSN
  • 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9280
OpenAlex
W2100479414
Cited by
460
References
5
FWCI
22.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.