Cited by 208Cognitive Abilities and TestingCognitive Functions and MemoryAging and Gerontology Research

Transfer of a Speed of Processing Intervention to Near and Far Cognitive Functions

Edwards, Jerri D., Wadley, Virginia G., Myers, Renee S., Roenker, Daniel L., Cissell, Gayla M., Ball, Karlene K.·2002·Gerontology

Abstract

Background: Evidence establishing the potential for modification of cognitive functioning in later adulthood has begun to accumulate. Objective: The primary goal of the current study was to evaluate, among older adults, the extent to which standardized speed of processing training transfers to similar and dissimilar speeded cognitive measures as well as to other domains of cognitive functioning. Methods: Ninety-seven older adults (mean age 73.71 years) were administered a battery of cognitive tests assessing intelligence, memory, attention, verbal fluency, visual-perceptual ability, speed of processing, and functional abilities. Forty-four of the participants received ten 1-hour sessions of speed of processing training. The remainder of participants were in a no-contact control group. Approximately 6 weeks after the pretraining assessment, all participants repeated the same battery of tests. Results: The results revealed training effects for some speed of processing measures, including performance of instrumental activities of daily living, but no transfer to other domains of cognitive functioning. Conclusion: Speed of processing training may enhance the speed at which older adults can perform instrumental activities of daily living.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000065259

Cites

41 of 41 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 43 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Edwards, J. D., Wadley, V. G., Myers, R. S., Roenker, D. L., Cissell, G. M., & Ball, K. K.
Affiliations
University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
Venue
Gerontology
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2002
Volume
48
Issue
5
Pages
329-340
ISSN
  • 0304-324X (ISSN-L)
  • 1423-0003
OpenAlex
W2064942197
Cited by
208
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 14
FWCI
8.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Gerontology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (P50AG011684, AG11684, AG-05739)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
Keywords
speed of processing training, older adults, cognitive aging, instrumental activities of daily living, memory, attention, verbal fluency, visual-perceptual abilities, functional capacity
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cognition, Cognition Disorders, Female, Humans, Intelligence, Male, Memory, Middle Aged, Neuropsychological Tests, Reaction Time, Transfer, Psychology, Verbal Learning, Comorbidity, Chi-Square Distribution

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