11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Language Measures of the NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          General mental ability in the world of work: occupational attainment and job performance.

          The psychological construct of general mental ability (GMA), introduced by C. Spearman (1904) nearly 100 years ago, has enjoyed a resurgence of interest and attention in recent decades. This article presents the research evidence that GMA predicts both occupational level attained and performance within one's chosen occupation and does so better than any other ability, trait, or disposition and better than job experience. The sizes of these relationships with GMA are also larger than most found in psychological research. Evidence is presented that weighted combinations of specific aptitudes tailored to individual jobs do not predict job performance better than GMA alone, disconfirming specific aptitude theory. A theory of job performance is described that explicates the central role of GMA in the world of work. These findings support Spearman's proposition that GMA is of critical importance in human affairs.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Revision of the Brief Visuospatial Memory Test: Studies of normal performance, reliability, and validity.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A life course model of cognitive activities, socioeconomic status, education, reading ability, and cognition.

              To cross-sectionally quantify the contribution of proxy measures of cognitive reserve reflective of the lifespan, such as education, socioeconomic status (SES), reading ability, and cognitive activities, in explaining late-life cognition. Prospective observational cohort study of aging. Retirement communities across the Chicago metropolitan area. Nine hundred fifty-one older adults free of clinical dementia in the Rush Memory and Aging Project (aged 79 ± 8, 74% female). Baseline data on multiple life course factors included early-, mid-, and late-life participation in cognitive activities; early-life and adult SES; education; and reading ability (National Adult Reading Test; NART). Path analysis quantified direct and indirect standardized effects of life course factors on global cognition and five cognitive domains (episodic memory, semantic memory, working memory, visuospatial ability, perceptual speed). Adjusting for age, sex, and race, education had the strongest association with global cognition, episodic memory, semantic memory, and visuospatial ability, whereas NART (followed by education) had the strongest association with working memory. Late-life cognitive activities had the strongest association with perceptual speed, followed by education. These cross-sectional findings suggest that education and reading ability are the most-robust proxy measures of cognitive reserve in relation to late-life cognition. Additional research leveraging path analysis is warranted to better understand how these life course factors, reflecting the latent construct of cognitive reserve, affect abnormal cognitive aging. © 2011, Copyright the Authors. Journal compilation © 2011, The American Geriatrics Society.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                applab
                Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society
                J Int Neuropsychol Soc
                Cambridge University Press (CUP)
                1355-6177
                1469-7661
                July 2014
                June 24 2014
                : 20
                : 06
                : 642-651
                Article
                10.1017/S1355617714000411
                24960128
                28465931-b786-44d6-92ad-9200a44aad65
                © 2014
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article