ArticleThe Yale journal of biology and medicine2019
Sequential Information Processing: The "Elevated First Response Effect" Can Contribute to Exaggerated Intra-Individual Variability in Older Adults.
Article in The Yale journal of biology and medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Individual Differences in the Impact of Distracting Environmental Sounds on the Performance of a Continuous Visual Task in Older Adults.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- Reaction Time Decomposition as a Tool to Study Subcortical Ischemic Vascular Cognitive Impairment.Journal of Alzheimer's disease reports · 2021Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study we examined attention-related reaction time (RT) and intra-individual variability (IIV) in younger and older adults using an iPad-based visual search test, in which, for each trial, participants were required to sequentially press a series of on-screen stimuli numbered from 1 to 8. Although overall performance RT was significantly slower, with greater IIV for the older compared to the younger adult group, there was also a disproportionately slowed RT and greater IIV for the first item in the series compared to all other responses within the trial. When the response to the first stimulus was removed from statistical analysis, the significant age-related RT slowing effect remained, but IIV was no longer significantly greater for the older compared to the younger adults. This pattern of results reveals a dichotomy between the preservation of RT and IIV in aging, and one that is strongly related to research methodology. A finding that may account, at least in part, for the outcome heterogeneity in the study of IIV in aging.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30923469PMC6430171What 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.