Aging and Executive Functioning: A Training Study on Focus-Switching

Abstract

Many studies suggest that age differences in a variety of cognitive tasks are due to age-related changes in executive control processes. However, not all executive control processes seem to be age-sensitive. Recently, Verhaeghen et al. (2005) described dissociable age effects in an executive control process responsible for the switching of representations between different functional units of working memory. This so called focus-switching process has two components: (1) the switching of representations from an activated part of long-term memory into a region of immediate access (focus of attention) and (2) the maintenance of representations outside the focus of attention. Age-related deficits occurred in maintaining representations outside the focus of attention, but were absent in switching representations into and out of the focus of attention (e.g., Dorbath and Titz, 2011). In the present study we applied a training approach to examine age-related differences in the trainability of maintenance and switching. We investigated 85 younger (age 19–35, M = 24.07, SD = 3.79) and 91 older (age 59–80, M = 66.27, SD = 4.75) adults using a continuous counting task in a pretest–training–posttest design. The participants were assigned to one of four training conditions differing in the demand to switch or to maintain. The results suggest the influence of training in both components of focus-switching for both, younger and older adults. However, age differences in the amount of training gains were observed. With respect to maintenance the results indicate a compensatory effect of training for older adults who improved their performance to the level of younger adults. With respect to switching, younger adults benefited more from training than older adults. Trainability is thus reduced in older adults with respect to switching, but not for maintenance.

Effects of Education on Executive Functioning and its Trainability

“…Younger as well as older adults' maintenance and switching performance benefit from training (Dorbath, Hasselhorn, & Titz, 2011). In order to attain optimal training gains, it might, however, be useful to pay attention not only to the training per se, but also to the trainees' predispositions-for example, their educational level.…”

Do Scores on an Attention Test Predict Scores on Executive Function Tests?

“…In addition to implications for assessment procedures, there is a need to further explore differences in treatment efficacy for individuals of different ages. For example, training on executive function tasks has been shown to have varying outcomes for older and younger adults [34]. The relationship between attention and executive function in older adults warrants more attention to develop age appropriate, beneficial, efficient, and efficacious therapeutic interventions.…”

Effects of working memory and attentional control training and their transfer onto fluid intelligence in early and late adulthood

“…This was explained to be the result of a reduction of developmental reserves and the decrease of plasticity associated with ageing (Baltes, 1997;Brehmer, Li, Müller, von Oertzen, & Lindenberger, 2007;Hertzog, Kramer, Wilson, & Lindenberger, 2009;Stine-Morrow & Basak, 2011;Karbach & Verhaeghen, 2014). Larger benefits for young people than older adults were also observed for some process-based training methods which train WM (Brehmer, Westerberg, & Bäckman, 2012;Dahlin, Nyberg, Bäckman, & Neely, 2008;Dorbath, Hasselhorn, & Titz, 2011;Schmiedek, Bauer, Lövdén, Brose, & Lindenberger, 2010;Zinke et al, 2014). These results were sometimes interpreted in the context of the so-called Matthew effect (or accumulated advantage) -that is, a larger increase in skills among people who already have an advantage in these very skills (in this case among young adults, for whom we do not observe the cognitive decline that is present among older adults) (von Bastian & Oberauer, 2014).…”