Lost ability to automatize task performance in old age

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 20, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 1206-1212

  Maquestiaux, François ^a   Didierjean, André ^b   Ruthruff, Eric ^c   Chauvel, Guillaume ^d   Hartley, Alan ^e  

^a UNIVERSITÉ PARIS SACLAY   (France)

^b UNIVERSITÉ DE FRANCHE COMTÉ   (France)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITÉ DE POITIERS   (France)

^e SCRIPPS COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Age; Attention; Dual task interference; Practice

Indexed keywords

AGED; AGING; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEARNING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOLOGICAL REFRACTORY PERIOD; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME;

AGED; AGING; ATTENTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PRACTICE (PSYCHOLOGY); PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; REFRACTORY PERIOD, PSYCHOLOGICAL;

EID: 84889589299     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: 15315320     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13423-013-0438-8     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Bergua, V., & Bouisson, J. (2008). Aging and routinization: A review. Psychologie & Neuropsychiatrie du Vieillissement, 6, 235-243.
2. Cerella, J. (1985). Information processing rates in the elderly. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 67-83.
3. Glass, J. M., Schumacher, E. H., Lauber, E. J., Zurbriggen, E. L., Gmeindl, L., Kieras, D. E., et al. (2000). Aging and the psychological refractory period: Task-coordination strategies in young and old adults. Psychology and Aging, 15, 571-595.
4. Hazeltine, E., Ruthruff, E., & Remington, R. W. (2006). The role of input and output modality pairings in dual-task performance: Evidence for content-dependent central interference. Cognitive Psychology, 52, 291-345.
5. Logan, G. D. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95, 492-527.
6. Maquestiaux, F., Laguë-Beauvais, M., Ruthruff, E., & Bherer, L. (2008). Bypassing the central bottleneck after single-task practice in the psychological refractory period paradigm: Evidence for task automatization and greedy resource recruitment. Memory and Cognition, 36, 1262-1282.
7. Maquestiaux, F., Laguë-Beauvais, M., Ruthruff, E., Hartley, A. A., & Bherer, L. (2010). Learning to bypass the central bottleneck: Declining automaticity with advancing age. Psychology and Aging, 25, 177-192.
8. Pashler, H., & Johnston, J. C. (1989). Chronometric evidence for central postponement in temporally overlapping tasks. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41A, 19-45.
9. Rush, B. K., Barch, D. M., & Braver, T. S. (2006). Accounting for cognitive aging: Context processing, inhibition or processing speed? Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 13, 588-610.
10. Ruthruff, E., van Selst, M., Johnston, J. C., & Remington, R. W. (2006). How does practice reduce dual-task interference: Integration, automatization, or just stage-shortening? Psychological Research, 70, 125-142.
11. Ruthruff, E., Johnston, J. C., van Selst, M., Whitsell, S., & Remington, R. (2003). Vanishing dual-task interference after practice: Has the bottleneck been eliminated or is it merely latent? Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 29, 280-289.
12. Strobach, T., Frensch, P., Müller, H., & Schubert, T. (2012). Age- and practice-related influences on dual-task costs and compensation mechanisms under optimal conditions of dual-task performance. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 19, 222-247.
13. Touron, D. R., & Hertzog, C. (2004). Distinguishing age differences in knowledge, strategy use, and confidence during strategic skill acquisition. Psychology and Aging, 19, 452-466.