2021
DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2021.682499
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Neural Correlates of Aging-Related Differences in Pro-active Control in a Dual Task

Abstract: Background: Multi-tasking is usually impaired in older people. In multi-tasking, a fixed order of sub-tasks can improve performance by promoting a time-structured preparation of sub-tasks. How proactive control prioritizes the pre-activation or inhibition of complex tasks in older people has received no sufficient clarification so far.Objective: To explore the effects of aging on neural proactive control mechanisms in a dual task.Methodology: To address this question, the psychological refractory period (PRP) … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 78 publications
(128 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Seventy-two percent of studies reported an age-associated decline (see Supplementary material ), but there was some inconsistency in the outcome measures reported. For example, some studies reported the TMT cost (the difference between RT or error rate in parts A and B; see, for example, Tournier et al, 2014 and Yordanova et al, 2021 ); others reported the measures of TMT parts A and B separately or just the part B measure (the shifting measure of the task without considering the non-shifting condition; see Müller et al, 2014 ); and Rey-Mermet et al ( 2018 ) reported the TMT ratio. Therefore, shifting ability and deficits may not be confidently compared across studies, and it is recommended that researchers should report scores for parts A and B alongside ratio or cost scores.…”
Section: A Review Of Executive Function Assessments From 2000 To 2022mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Seventy-two percent of studies reported an age-associated decline (see Supplementary material ), but there was some inconsistency in the outcome measures reported. For example, some studies reported the TMT cost (the difference between RT or error rate in parts A and B; see, for example, Tournier et al, 2014 and Yordanova et al, 2021 ); others reported the measures of TMT parts A and B separately or just the part B measure (the shifting measure of the task without considering the non-shifting condition; see Müller et al, 2014 ); and Rey-Mermet et al ( 2018 ) reported the TMT ratio. Therefore, shifting ability and deficits may not be confidently compared across studies, and it is recommended that researchers should report scores for parts A and B alongside ratio or cost scores.…”
Section: A Review Of Executive Function Assessments From 2000 To 2022mentioning
confidence: 99%