The DOI matches its Crossref record; 72 of the 73 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet.
Age differences in intra-individual variability in simple and choice reaction time: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Intra-individual variability in reaction time (RT IIV) is considered to be an index of central nervous system functioning. Such variability is elevated in neurodegenerative diseases or following traumatic brain injury. It has also been suggested to increase with age in healthy ageing. OBJECTIVES: To investigate and quantify age differences in RT IIV in healthy ageing; to examine the effect of different tasks and procedures; to compare raw and mean-adjusted measures of RT IIV. DATA SOURCES: Four electronic databases: PsycINFO, Medline, Web of Science and EMBASE, and hand searching of reference lists of relevant studies. STUDY ELIGIBILITY: English language journal articles, books or book chapters, containing quantitative empirical data on simple and/or choice RT IIV. Samples had to include younger (under 60 years) and older (60 years and above) human adults. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS: Studies were evaluated in terms of sample representativeness and data treatment. Relevant data were extracted, using a specially-designed form, from the published report or obtained directly from the study authors. Age-group differences in raw and RT-mean-adjusted measures of simple and choice RT IIV were quantified using random effects meta-analyses. RESULTS: Older adults (60+ years) had greater RT IIV than younger (20-39) and middle-aged (40-59) adults. Age effects were larger in choice RT tasks than in simple RT tasks. For all measures of RT IIV, effect sizes were larger for the comparisons between older and younger adults than between older and middle-aged adults, indicating that the age-related increases in RT IIV are not limited to old age. Effect sizes were also larger for raw than for RT-mean-adjusted RT IIV measures. CONCLUSIONS: RT IIV is greater among older adults. Some (but not all) of the age-related increases in RT IIV are accounted for by the increased RT means.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“However, in contrast to previous studies (Dykiert et al., 2012a), older participants in the current study showed reduced CVs.”
From Age-related slowing of response selection and production in a visual choice reaction time task (2015) · cites this paper as Dykiert et al., 2012a
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“In contrast to previous studies (Dykiert et al., 2012a), we did not observe an increase in the CV of trial-to-trial RT variance with age.”
From Age-related slowing of response selection and production in a visual choice reaction time task (2015) · cites this paper as Dykiert et al., 2012a
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“As in previous studies (Deary and Der, 2005; Der and Deary, 2006; Dykiert et al., 2012a), we found significant increases in SRT variance with age.”
From Factors influencing the latency of simple reaction time (2015) · cites this paper as Dykiert et al., 2012a
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“We also found significant age-related increases in SRT variance, and, in Experiment 2, increases in the CV as well, consistent with previous reports (Dykiert et al., 2012a).”
From Factors influencing the latency of simple reaction time (2015) · cites this paper as Dykiert et al., 2012a
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“The rate of age-related SRT slowing that we observed (mean 0.50 ms/year) was similar to that of Dykiert et al. (2012a), but considerably less than the slowing observed in other SRT studies (Deary and Der, 2005; Reeves et al., 2007; Vincent et al., 2008; Deary et al., 2011).”
From Factors influencing the latency of simple reaction time (2015) · cites this paper as Dykiert et al. (2012a)
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.
Citations
Cites
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 · Cited by 64,042
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement.
(2009) · PubMed Central · Cited by 44,859
Wang, G., Ma, R., Qiao, G., Wada, K., Aizawa, Y., & Satoh, T. (2015) · Integrative Medicine International · doi:10.1159/000368408 · Cited by 18,762
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009) · doi:10.1002/9780470743386 · Cited by 14,225
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000) · Biometrics · doi:10.1111/j.0006-341x.2000.00455.x · Cited by 14,099
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021) · doi:10.1002/9781119558378 · Cited by 9,799
The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results.
Rosenthal, R. (1979) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638 · Cited by 9,068
Cohen, J. (1992) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155 · Cited by 8,771
A Nonparametric “Trim and Fill” Method of Accounting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.2000.10473905 · Cited by 2,955
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- [18]Brebner JT, Welford AT (1980) Introduction: an historical background sketch. In Reaction times Welford AT, editor. Academic Press, New York 1– 23.
- [19]Lahtela K, Niemi P, Kuusela V (1985) Adult visual choice-reaction time, age, sex, and preparedness. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 26: 357– 362. 4089563
- [30]Hogan MJ (2003) Average speed or variable speed–what do older adults really need? Irish Journal of Psychology 24: 161– 183.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–218 of 218
Paris, H. L. R., Ganey, A. E., Goll, A. F., Kroeze, A. W., Thomas, T. M., Webster, F. E., & Pennell, A. (2025) · Journal of Applied Physiology · doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00844.2025
Mathieu, A., Schöllkopf, U., Chen, S., Widmann, A., Wetzel, N., & Bidet‐Caulet, A. (2025) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2025.11.01.684607
Saldıran, T. Ç., Tanhan, A., Çelikel, R., & Dinçer, E. (2025) · Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics · doi:10.1016/j.jmpt.2025.10.054
Empirical research in very old age (80+)
y Hausmann, A. O., & Zank, S. (2026) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-26629-4.00251-3
Babic, I. M., & Jovanovic, N. P. (2025) · Journal of Medical Sciences and Interdisciplinary Research · doi:10.51847/y761zrohqx
Evaluation of reaction time: A pilot study on the concurrent validity of the Smart Speed® device
Eken, F., Horata, E. T., Türkmen, Ö., & Erel, S. (2026) · Turkish Journal of Kinesiology · doi:10.31459/turkjkin.1849417
Kemp, S. A., Stevenson, N., Puri, R., Forstmann, B. U., & Hinder, M. R. (2026) · Neurobiology of Aging · doi:10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2026.03.008
Reaction Time and Focus on Esports
Kilci, A. K. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-25090-2_8
Petrenko, Y., & Severynchuk, V. (2026) · Lecture notes in electrical engineering · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-23369-1_3
Pradhan, G. N., Kingsbury, S. E., Stepánek, J., Cevette, M. J., & Caselli, R. J. (2026) · Journal of Eye Movement Research · doi:10.3390/jemr19050113
Retinal Layer Changes With Aging and Cognitive Decline in Rhesus Macaques
Liu, Y., Prabhakar, M., McIntyre, E., Sin, T.-N., Villafuerte-Trisolini, C., Kinnally, E. L., Ceniceros, L. C., Cruz, A. M., Cunningham, A. D., Li, H., et al. (2026) · Translational Vision Science & Technology · doi:10.1167/tvst.15.8.14
Cognitive aging: an overview of the field and insights into future directions
Anstey, K. J., & Leung, Y. (2026) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-27490-9.00014-2
Inter- and intra- individual variability in audiovisual multisensory processes in healthy ageing
Middelmann, N. K., Ecabert, L., Ortega, E. V., Griffa, A., Guevara, A. B., Allali, G., Bartlett, J. E., & Murray, M. M. (2026) · Aging Brain · doi:10.1016/j.nbas.2026.100168
Reward learning in prolonged grief: Evidence from the probabilistic reward task
Azevedo, S., & Bryant, R. A. (2026) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.brat.2026.105164
Machida, K., & Johnson, K. A. (2026) · Child Neuropsychology · doi:10.1080/09297049.2026.2744732
Unsworth, N. (2026) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-026-03012-4
Kolkkaa myyrä – Ikääntyvien toimintakykyä tukeva liikuntakonsepti
Rautala, T., & Heimo, I. (2014)
Metadata
- Authors
- Dykiert, D., Der, G., Starr, J. M., & Deary, I. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Edinburgh (GB)
- MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Dykiert, Dominika
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2012-10-11
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- e45759
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3469552
- OpenAlex
- W2114369674
- Cited by
- 218
- References
- 73
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8
- FWCI
- 0.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion)
- Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- University of Edinburgh (G0700704/84698)
- Centre for Cognitive Ageing and Cognitive Epidemiology (G0700704/84698)
- Directorate for Biological Sciences
- Medical Research Council (G0700704)
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
- Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (G0700704/84698)
- Economic and Social Research Council
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
- Keywords
- within-person variability, reaction time, age differences, healthy aging, older adults, choice reaction time, simple reaction time, central nervous system function, cognitive aging
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Choice Behavior, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Reaction Time, Publication Bias
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
