↓ Skip to main content

Cognitive aging on latent constructs for visual processing capacity: a novel structural equation modeling framework with causal assumptions based on a theory of visual attention

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Cognitive aging on latent constructs for visual processing capacity: a novel structural equation modeling framework with causal assumptions based on a theory of visual attention
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01596
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simon Nielsen, L. Inge Wilms

Abstract

We examined the effects of normal aging on visual cognition in a sample of 112 healthy adults aged 60-75. A testbattery was designed to capture high-level measures of visual working memory and low-level measures of visuospatial attention and memory. To answer questions of how cognitive aging affects specific aspects of visual processing capacity, we used confirmatory factor analyses in Structural Equation Modeling (SEM; Model 2), informed by functional structures that were modeled with path analyses in SEM (Model 1). The results show that aging effects were selective to measures of visual processing speed compared to visual short-term memory (VSTM) capacity (Model 2). These results are consistent with some studies reporting selective aging effects on processing speed, and inconsistent with other studies reporting aging effects on both processing speed and VSTM capacity. In the discussion we argue that this discrepancy may be mediated by differences in age ranges, and variables of demography. The study demonstrates that SEM is a sensitive method to detect cognitive aging effects even within a narrow age-range, and a useful approach to structure the relationships between measured variables, and the cognitive functional foundation they supposedly represent.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 38 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 15%
Student > Master 6 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 6 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 11 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 10%
Neuroscience 4 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 9 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 March 2015.
All research outputs
#14,208,760
of 22,778,347 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#15,069
of 29,687 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,971
of 379,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#284
of 400 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,778,347 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,687 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 379,767 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 400 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.