Sliwinski M, Hofer S
Saul R. Korey Department of Neurology and Rose F. Kennedy Center for Mental Retardation and Human Development, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY 10461, USA.
Gerontology. 1999 Nov-Dec;45(6):351-4. doi: 10.1159/000022120.
Luszcz and Bryan review research supporting three theories of age-related memory loss: the speed hypothesis, the executive function hypothesis, and the common cause hypothesis.
The aim of this commentary is to extend that review by encouraging consideration of the strength (or lack thereof) of the empirical evidence supporting theories of age-related memory loss.
Arguments are presented that call into the question the strength of the evidence that derives from cross-sectional analysis of individual difference sources of variance.
Supporting evidence for mediational hypotheses of cognitive aging (1) derives from potentially ambiguous statistical techniques; (2) is based on untested assumptions about the between and within person sources of variance; (3) is not supported by longitudinal studies, and (4) relies heavily on arguments of parsimony.
Existing evidence is not strong enough to grant any particular theory presumptive status. We concur with Luszcz and Bryan that supplementing the now popular individual differences research designs with alternative approaches would advance theory development and testing.
卢施茨和布赖恩回顾了支持与年龄相关记忆丧失的三种理论的研究:速度假说、执行功能假说和共同原因假说。
本评论的目的是通过鼓励考虑支持与年龄相关记忆丧失理论的实证证据的强度(或缺乏强度)来扩展该综述。
提出的论点对来自个体差异方差来源的横断面分析的证据强度提出了质疑。
认知老化中介假说的支持证据:(1)来自潜在模糊的统计技术;(2)基于关于个体间和个体内方差来源的未经检验的假设;(3)未得到纵向研究的支持;(4)严重依赖简约性论点。
现有证据不足以赋予任何特定理论推定地位。我们同意卢施茨和布赖恩的观点,即用替代方法补充目前流行的个体差异研究设计将推进理论发展和检验。