Trial reportThe journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences2014
Adult age differences in learning on a sequentially cued prediction task.
Trial report in The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- White matter microstructural correlates of associative learning in the oldest-old.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2023Article
- Age group differences in learning-related activity reflect task stage, not learning stage.Behavioural brain research · 2022Article
- Age-Related Decline in Learning Deterministic Judgment-Based Sequences.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2020Article
- The Effects of Structural Complexity on Age-Related Deficits in Implicit Probabilistic Sequence Learning.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2016Article
- Social incentives improve deliberative but not procedural learning in older adults.Frontiers in psychology · 2015Article
- Adult age differences in subjective and objective measures of strategy use on a sequentially cued prediction task.Neuropsychology, development, and cognition. Section B, Aging, neuropsychology and cognition · 2015Article
- Event simultaneity does not eliminate age deficits in implicit probabilistic sequence learning.International journal of aging & human development · 2014Article
- Aging mind and brain: is implicit learning spared in healthy aging?Frontiers in psychology · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesMuch of adaptive behavior relies on the ability to learn and generate predictions about relationships in the environment. Research on aging suggests both that there is an age deficit in the ability to learn sequential relationships and that this deficit in learning could underlie age differences reported in many decision-making tasks. This article introduces the Triplets Prediction Task (TPT) to investigate the learning of sequential relationships that underlies adaptive behavior.
methodIn the TPT, participants see 2 successive visual cues and then predict which target will follow. Unknown to participants, there is a predictive relationship between the first cue and the target such that each of 4 cues predicts 1 of 4 targets 85% of the time.
resultsAlthough both age groups demonstrated learning on this task, an age deficit in learning appeared early and performance differences persisted throughout training. There was also evidence of age differences in the learning systems engaged during the task. DISCUSSION: These results are consistent with previous studies of learning and prediction, and they support the growing literature showing adult age differences in decision making from experience.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.