Age differences in gain- and loss-motivated attention

Abstract

Adaptive gain theory suggests that the phasic release of norepinephrine (NE) to cortical areas reflects changes in the utility of ongoing tasks. In the context of aging, this theory raises interesting questions, given that the motivations of older adults differ from those of younger adults. According to socioemotional selectivity theory (Carstensen, Isaacowitz, & Charles, 1999), aging is associated with greater emphasis on emotion-regulation goals, leading older adults to prioritize positive over negative information.This suggests that the phasic release of NE in response to threatening stimuli may be diminished in older adults. In the present study, younger adults (aged 18-34 years) and older adults (60-82 years) completed the Attention Network Test (ANT), modified to include an incentive manipulation. A behavioral index of attentional alerting served as a marker of phasic arousal. For younger adults, this marker correlated with the effect of both gain and loss incentives on performance. For older adults, in contrast, the correlation between phasic arousal and incentive sensitivity held for gain incentives only. These findings suggest that the enlistment of phasic NE activity may be specific to approach-oriented motivation in older adults.

Transient and sustained incentive effects on electrophysiological indices of cognitive control in younger and older adults

“…However, because the incentives provided no information regarding the upcoming target, this strategy may have been inefficient. Indeed, previous attempts to combine flanker stimuli with incentive-related information have also failed to observe a reduction of flanker interference (e.g., Hübner & Schlösser, 2010;Ivanov et al, 2012;Williams, Biel, Dyson, & Spaniol, 2017). By contrast, Chiew and Braver (2016) demonstrated reduced flanker interference using incentive cues, though, only when such cues were presented in conjunction with information about the upcoming target.…”

Physical Therapy for Neurological Conditions in Geriatric Populations

“…Not infrequently seen in the aging brain are momentary (i.e., transient ischemic attack) ( 18 ), permanent impairment, functional disability, and personality changes ( 19 ), which can vary greatly in severity and progression. Aging brains may oftentimes be associated with deficiencies in various regions of the nervous system responsible for vestibular function and motor control (e.g., reduced reaction time, impaired coordinative movements), speech and language function (e.g., anomias), thinking (e.g., confusion, disorientation), sensory perception, learning, mental fatigue, attention, judgment, problem solving (e.g., agnosias, apraxias), ADL and instrumental ADL (e.g., dressing, eating, personal hygiene, shopping, house work, transportation) sleeping, mood (e.g., depression and melancholy), behavioral changes (e.g., stress, anxiety, confusion or delirium, fear, loneliness/isolation) ( 20 ), and disorganized behavior and doing unusual things (e.g., shouting, undressing in public).…”

Losing Money and Motivation: Effects of Loss Incentives on Motivation and Metacognition in Younger and Older Adults

“…Second, most studies have focused on measures related to attention and cognitive control (Di Rosa, Schiff, Cagnolati, & Mapelli, 2015;Schmitt, Ferdinand, & Kray, 2015;Schmitt, Kray, & Ferdinand, 2017;Williams, Biel, Dyson, & Spaniol, 2017;Williams, Kudus, Dyson, & Spaniol, 2018;Yee, Adams, Beck, & Braver, 2019), and only a handful have compared young and older adults. To our knowledge, despite well-established and large age differences in working memory, and the fundamental role working memory is thought to play in performance in many domains, only one study has examined the effects of incentive on working memory in younger and older adults (Thurm, Zink, & Li, 2018).…”

“…It does not appear to apply to the motivation-cognition interactions of interest here. Indeed, although there are only a few studies examining the effects of loss incentive on older adults' response to cognitive demands, they are relatively consistent in showing that older adults have either an equivalent or reduced response to loss incentive compared to young adults (e.g., Di Rosa, Schiff, Cagnolati, & Mapelli, 2015;Pachur, Mata, & Hertwig, 2017;Schmitt et al, 2015Schmitt et al, , 2017Williams, Biel, Dyson, & Spaniol, 2017;Williams, Kudus, Dyson, & Spaniol, 2018)). Thus, while we note that the motivational shift hypothesis might superficially appear to predict larger performance improvements, greater motivation, and increased metacognitive accuracy for older adults in the loss condition, we do not consider it likely to apply to the current study.…”

“…In most cases, the reduced loss sensitivity of older adults primarily concerns neural or electrophysiological responses to the incentive cue. Overall performance quality often shows similar incentive effects for the two age groups, though there may be some differences in speed-accuracy tradeoffs (e.g., Schmitt et al, 2015;Williams et al, 2017Williams et al, , 2018. This suggests that older adults may be less responsive to loss-incentive cues, but equally (and in some cases, even more so) responsive to the actual delivery of loss incentive.…”