Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21859180›Full record

ArticlePsychological bulletin2011

All data collection and analysis methods have limitations: reply to Rabbitt (2011) and Raz and Lindenberger (2011).

Timothy A Salthouse

Abstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological bulletin, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Neural Contributions to Reduced Fluid Intelligence across the Adult Lifespan.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The Role of Dysfunctional Sexual Beliefs and Sexual Self-Esteem in Sexual Aggression: A Study with Male College Students.International journal of sexual health : official journal of the World Association for Sexual Health · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Timothy A SalthouseDepartment of Psychology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4400, USA. salthouse@virginia.edu

Funding

Short-term cognitive change in adults from 18 to 80R37AG024270 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA CHARLOTTESVILLE · PI SALTHOUSE, TIMOTHY · 2005 to 2014
$4.4M
NIA NIH HHS R37 AG024270
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The commentaries on my article contain a number of points with which I disagree but also several with which I agree. For example, I continue to believe that the existence of many cases in which between-person variability does not increase with age indicates that greater variance with increased age is not inevitable among healthy individuals up to about 80 years of age. I also do not believe that problems of causal inferences from correlational information are more severe in the cognitive neuroscience of aging than in other research areas; I contend instead that neglect of these problems has led to confusion about neurobiological underpinnings of cognitive aging. I agree that researchers need to be cautious in extrapolating from cross-sectional to longitudinal relations, but I also note that even longitudinal data are limited with respect to their ability to support causal inferences.

Indexed as

AgingBrainCognition DisordersHumans

Identifiers

PMID21859180
PMCPMC3160711

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.