ArticlePloS one2020
Older adults preserve accuracy but not precision in explicit and implicit rhythmic timing.
Article in PloS one, 2020. 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.
- Temporal Probability-Guided Shifts in Temporal Preparation Away from the Beat Under a Distracting Rhythm in Aging.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Age-related differences in implicit temporal preparation.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- The effect of auditory rhythm on the temporal allocation of visual attention in aging.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- The effect of rhythm on selective listening in multiple-source environments for young and older adults.Hearing research · 2023Article
- Resting heart rate (variability) and cognition relationships reveal cognitively healthy individuals with pathological amyloid/tau ratio.Frontiers in epidemiology · 2023Article
- Differential sensitivity to speech rhythms in young and older adults.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Explicit and implicit timing in older adults: Dissociable associations with age and cognitive decline.PloS one · 2022Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aging brings with it several forms of neurophysiological and cognitive deterioration, but whether a decline in temporal processing is part of the aging process is unclear. The current study investigated whether this timing deficit has a cause independent of those of memory and attention using rhythmic stimuli that reduce the demand for these higher cognitive functions. In Study 1, participants took part in two rhythmic timing tasks: explicit and implicit. Participants had to distinguish regular from irregular sequences while processing temporal information explicitly or implicitly. Results showed that while the accuracy in the implicit timing task was preserved, older adults had more noise in their performance in the explicit and implicit tasks. In Study 2, participants took part in a dual-implicit task to explore whether the performance of temporal tasks differed with increasing task difficulty. We found that increasing task difficulty magnifies age-related differences.
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.