Sustained attention, attentional selectivity, and attentional capacity across the lifespan

Abstract

Changes in sustained attention, attentional selectivity, and attentional capacity were examined in a sample of 113 participants between the ages of 12 and 75. To measure sustained attention, we employed the sustained-attention-to-response task (Robertson, Manly, Andrade, Baddeley, & Yiend, Neuropsychologia 35:747-58, 1997), a short continuousperformance test designed to capture fluctuations in sustained attention. To measure attentional selectivity and capacity, we employed a paradigm based on the theory of visual attention (Bundesen, Psychological Review 97:523-547, 1990), which enabled the estimation of parameters related to attentional selection, perceptual threshold, visual short-term memory capacity, and processing capacity. We found evidence of agerelated decline in each of the measured variables, but the declines varied markedly in terms of magnitude and lifespan trajectory. Variables relating to attentional capacity showed declines of very large effect sizes, while variables relating to attentional selectivity and sustained attention showed declines of medium to large effect sizes, suggesting that attentional control is relatively preserved in older adults. The variables relating to sustained attention followed a U-shaped, curvilinear trend, and the variables relating to attentional selectivity and capacity showed linear decline from early adulthood, providing further support for the differentiation of attentional functions.

Neural correlates of age-related decline and compensation in visual attention capacity

“…Note that for single-stimulus recognition, an individual's observed accuracy of letter report, as a function of effective exposure duration s, is simply 1 À exp[ÀC s ]. In the present study, parameters t 0 and m were mainly estimated to obtain valid estimates of the 2 parameters of main interest, C and K. In accordance with previous reports (McAvinue et al, 2012), t 0 exhibited a (marginally significant) trend to be longer in older than in younger participants (t[38] ¼ 1.98; p ¼ 0.06).…”

“…Finally, the task simplicity and the use of short, individually adapted, exposure durations render systematic age variations in task strategy and difficulty (owing to differences in perceptual thresholds) very unlikely. Behavioral TVAbased parameter modeling has recently demonstrated age-related decline in visual processing speed and storage capacity (Habekost et al, 2013;McAvinue et al, 2012). However, it remains unclear whether the same neural mechanisms underlying interindividual performance differences in younger individuals also contribute to age-related decline of the 2 functions, or whether different mechanisms account for performance variations in older age.…”

The effects of immunologic brainstem encephalopathy on cognitive function following awakening from a progressive autoimmune coma

“…c For norm-referenced scores: Robertson et al (1994). For controls' reference scores: McAvinue et al (2012). d Thurstone (1938).…”

“…The patient also showed a response inhibition deficit, producing significantly more false presses on a go/no-go task (random SART) compared to a control sample. A more detailed analysis of random SART key variables was conducted with one-sample t-tests to Downloaded by [Adams State University] at 07:49 10 October 2014 analyze differences in SART performance between the patient and a group of healthy age-matched controls (n = 13, male = 7; female = 6; mean age = 23.6 years; SD = 3.9 years; see Mcavinue et al, 2012, for healthy control sample SART data). The patient committed more errors of omission (t(12) = −11.08, p < .05), more errors of commission (t(12) = −5.32, p < .05), and exhibited greater response variability (t(12) = -54.47, p < .05) than controls.…”

Long-Term High-Effort Endurance Exercise in Older Adults: Diminishing Returns for Cognitive and Brain Aging

“…Contributing factors likely include slower processing speed (Salthouse, 1996(Salthouse, , 2000, reduced attentional processing resources (Craik, 2006;McAvinue et al, 2012), loss of inhibitory functions (Darowski, Helder, Zacks, Hasher, & Hambrick, 2008;Peltsch, Hemraj, Garcia, & Munoz, 2011;Zanto, Rubens, Thangavel, & Gazzaley, 2011), and decline in controlled processing (Coubard et al, 2011).…”