ArticleThe journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences2025
Characterizing Cognitive Dispersion and Its Correlates Across the Adult Lifespan in MIDUS.
Article in The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences, 2025. 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.
- Exploring the potential of cognitive intra-individual variability in HIV care and research in adults with HIV: a concept analysis.Applied neuropsychology. Adult · 2026Review
- Associations among response time inconsistency, attention switching, and cognitive status: A measurement burst approach.Neuropsychology · 2026Article
- Perceived control buffers against variability in day-to-day cognition in midlife and older age.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2026Article
- Cognitive dispersion in established adulthood: etiology and implications for cognitive aging.Innovation in aging · 2026Article
- Refining cognitive dispersion metrics for brain-behavior prediction in aging and mild cognitive impairment.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAlthough research has shown that higher levels of within-person variability across cognitive tasks (dispersion) are associated with cognitive decline in clinical samples, little is known about dispersion in comparatively younger, nonclinical, and national samples. A better understanding of dispersion is needed to elucidate for whom and under what circumstances dispersion can be used as a reliable indicator of cognitive health.
methodWe used data from the Midlife in the United States Study (MIDUS; n = 2,229; Mage = 56 years, range = 33-83; 56% female) to: (a) characterize dispersion and its cross-sectional correlates in a nonclinical, adult lifespan sample and (b) examine changes in dispersion over time to determine for whom changes in dispersion may reflect better or worse cognitive aging.
resultsCorrelations showed higher levels of dispersion were associated with higher levels of mean performance at both waves (rs = 0.28-0.29). Autoregressive main effect models showed that increases in dispersion were associated with less decline in mean performance over the 2-wave, 9-year follow-up period (β = 0.17, p < .001). Moderation models showed that the link between change in dispersion and change in mean performance was pronounced in comparatively older adults (β = 0.28), women (β = 0.27), individuals with less education (β = 0.23), and those with lower income (β = 0.23; all ps < .001). DISCUSSION: Findings suggest that increases in dispersion may not always be maladaptive in normative, adult lifespan samples and may reflect healthier cognitive profiles in individuals who are at greater risk for cognitive impairment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.