11 results
1 Subjective Cognitive Concerns, Neuropsychological Test Performances, and Frontoparietal Thickness and Connectivity in High-Functioning Older Adults
- Justin E. Karr, Jonathan G. Hakun, Daniel B. Elbich, Cristina N. Pinheiro, Frederick A. Schmitt, Suzanne C. Segerstrom
-
- Journal:
- Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society / Volume 29 / Issue s1 / November 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 21 December 2023, pp. 102-103
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Objective:
Neuropsychologists have difficulty detecting cognitive decline in high-functioning older adults, in whom substantially greater neurological change may need to occur before performance on cognitive tests are low enough to indicate cognitive impairment. For high-functioning older adults, subjective cognitive concerns (SCC) may indicate decline that is not detected by the presence of low cognitive test scores but may be related to the absence of high scores and the presence of latent neurological changes. We hypothesized that high-functioning older adults with SCC would have fewer high scores than those without concerns, but a comparable number of low scores. These findings would indicate that objective decline has occurred but would not be detected by a traditional focus on low scores. We also hypothesized that SCC would be associated with lower frontoparietal network volume, thickness, and connectivity, indicating latent neurological change underlying subjective cognitive concerns.
Participants and Methods:Participants from an imaging sub-study of an ongoing longitudinal aging study were selected if they had high estimated premorbid functioning, defined as either (a) estimated intelligence >75th percentile on the North American Adult Reading Test (n=48) or (b) having a college degree (n=62). This resulted in 68 participants subdivided based on SCC, defined as one or more self-reported SCC on the Medical Outcomes Study Cognitive Functioning Scale (MOS-Cog). Participants with SCC (n=35; 73.9 years-old, SD=9.6, range: 60-95; 62.9% female; 94.3% White) and without SCC (n=33; 71.0 years-old, SD=7.2, range: 61-85, 75.8% female; 100% White) completed a neuropsychological test battery of memory and executive functions, including the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, Trail Making Test Parts A and B, Controlled Oral Word Association Test, Digit Span, and Letter-Number Sequencing, and underwent structural MRI. MR images were analyzed for frontoparietal network volume, thickness, and connectivity.
Results:Participants with and without SCC were compared on the number of low test scores (i.e., at or below the 16th percentile) and high test scores (i.e., at or above the 75th percentile), finding a comparable number of low scores, t=1.66, p=.103, d=.40, but a lower number of high scores among participants with SCC, t=2.95, p=.004, d=.71. Participants with SCC had lower bilateral mean frontoparietal network volumes (left: t=2.98, p=.004, d=.74; right: t=2.63, p=.011, d=.66) and cortical thickness (left: t=2.65, p=.010, d=.66; right: t=2.18, p=.033, d=.54), but did not differ from those without SCC in terms of network connectivity.
Conclusions:SCC have been reported as a potential risk factor for dementia in older adults. High-functioning older adults with SCC presented with fewer high scores than those without SCC but had a comparable number of low scores. Among high-functioning older adults, subjective cognitive decline may correspond with objective cognitive change not detected by the traditional emphasis on low scores, but rather the absence of high scores. SCC were also related to underlying changes in the volume and thickness of the frontoparietal network, but not connectivity. In high-functioning older adults, subjective cognitive decline may correspond with a reduction from high average functioning in some domains and underlying neurological changes.
49 Examining Associations Between Intelligence and Adaptive Functioning in Adults with Down Syndrome at Risk for Alzheimer's Disease
- Sheliza Ali, Jordan Harp, Allison M. Caban-Holt, Brandon Dennis, Elizabeth Head, Jennifer Wells, Frederick Schmitt
-
- Journal:
- Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society / Volume 29 / Issue s1 / November 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 21 December 2023, pp. 256-257
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Objective:
Individuals with Down syndrome (DS) experience intellectual disability, such that measures of cognitive and adaptive functioning are near the normative floor upon evaluation. Individuals with DS are also at increased risk for Alzheimer's disease (AD) beginning around age 40; and test performances and adaptive ratings at the normative floor make it difficult to detect change in cognition and functioning. This study first assessed the range of raw intelligence scores and raw adaptive functioning of individuals with DS at the normative floor. Next, we assessed whether those raw intelligence scores were predictive of raw adaptive functioning scores, and by association, whether they may be meaningful when assessing change in individuals with a lower baseline of cognitive functioning.
Participants and Methods:Participants were selected from a cohort of 117 adults with DS in a longitudinal study examining AD risk. Participants (n=96; M=40.9 years-old, SD=10.67; 57.3% female) were selected if they had both a completed measure of IQ (Kaufmann Brief Intelligence Test; KBIT2) and informant ratings of adaptive functioning (Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales; VABS-II). Multiple regression was conducted predicting VABS-II total raw score using K-BIT2 total raw score, while controlling for age.
Results:A slight majority (57.3%) of the sample had a standardized IQ score of 40 with the majority (95.7%) having a standardized score at or below 60. Additionally, 85.3% of the sample had a standard VABS-II score at or below 60. Within the normative floor for the KBIT2 (IQ=40), there was a normal distribution and substantial range of both KBIT2 raw scores (M = 31.19, SD = 13.19, range: 2 to 41) and VABS-II raw scores (M = 406.33, SD = 84.91, range: 198 to 569). Using the full sample, age significantly predicted raw VABS-II scores (ß = -.283, p = .008). When KBIT2 raw scores were included in the model, age was no longer an independently significant predictor. KBIT2 raw scores significantly predicted raw VABS-II scores (ß = .689, p < .001). Age alone accounted for 8.0% of variance in VABS-II raw scores and KBIT2 raw scores accounted for 43.8% additional variance in VABS-II raw scores. This relationship was maintained when the sample was reduced to individuals at the normative floor (n = 51) where KBIT2 raw scores accounted for 23.7% of the variance in raw VABS-II scores (ß = .549, p < .001).
Conclusions:The results indicate that meaningful variability exists among raw intelligence test performances that may be masked by scores at the normative floor. Further, the variability in raw intelligence scores is associated with variability in adaptive functioning, such that lower intelligence scores are associated with lower ratings of adaptive functioning. Considering this relationship would be masked by a reduction of range due to norming, these findings indicate that raw test performances and adaptive functioning ratings may have value when monitoring change in adults with DS at risk for AD.
Detecting cognitive decline in high-functioning older adults: The relationship between subjective cognitive concerns, frequency of high neuropsychological test scores, and the frontoparietal control network
- Justin E. Karr, Jonathan G. Hakun, Daniel B. Elbich, Cristina N. Pinheiro, Frederick A. Schmitt, Suzanne C. Segerstrom
-
- Journal:
- Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society / Volume 30 / Issue 3 / March 2024
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 26 September 2023, pp. 220-231
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Objective:
Neuropsychologists have difficulty detecting cognitive decline in high-functioning older adults because greater neurological change must occur before cognitive performances are low enough to indicate decline or impairment. For high-functioning older adults, early neurological changes may correspond with subjective cognitive concerns and an absence of high scores. This study compared high-functioning older adults with and without subjective cognitive concerns, hypothesizing those with cognitive concerns would have fewer high scores on neuropsychological testing and lower frontoparietal network volume, thickness, and connectivity.
Method:Participants had high estimated premorbid functioning (e.g., estimated intelligence ≥75th percentile or college-educated) and were divided based on subjective cognitive concerns. Participants with cognitive concerns (n = 35; 74.0 ± 9.6 years old, 62.9% female, 94.3% White) and without cognitive concerns (n = 33; 71.2 ± 7.1 years old, 75.8% female, 100% White) completed a neuropsychological battery of memory and executive function tests and underwent structural and resting-state magnetic resonance imaging, calculating frontoparietal network volume, thickness, and connectivity.
Results:Participants with and without cognitive concerns had comparable numbers of low test scores (≤16th percentile), p = .103, d = .40. Participants with cognitive concerns had fewer high scores (≥75th percentile), p = .004, d = .71, and lower mean frontoparietal network volumes (left: p = .004, d = .74; right: p = .011, d = .66) and cortical thickness (left: p = .010, d = .66; right: p = .033, d = .54), but did not differ in network connectivity.
Conclusions:Among high-functioning older adults, subjective cognitive decline may correspond with an absence of high scores on neuropsychological testing and underlying changes in the frontoparietal network that would not be detected by a traditional focus on low cognitive test scores.
Attitudes toward advance care planning among persons with dementia and their caregivers
- Corinne Pettigrew, Rostislav Brichko, Betty Black, Maureen K. O’Connor, Mary Guerriero Austrom, Maisha T. Robinson, Allison Lindauer, Raj C. Shah, Guerry M. Peavy, Kayla Meyer, Frederick A. Schmitt, Jennifer H. Lingler, Kimiko Domoto-Reilly, Dorothy Farrar-Edwards, Marilyn Albert
-
- Journal:
- International Psychogeriatrics / Volume 32 / Issue 5 / May 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 16 July 2019, pp. 585-599
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Objectives:
To examine factors that influence decision-making, preferences, and plans related to advance care planning (ACP) and end-of-life care among persons with dementia and their caregivers, and examine how these may differ by race.
Design:Cross-sectional survey.
Setting:13 geographically dispersed Alzheimer’s Disease Centers across the United States.
Participants:431 racially diverse caregivers of persons with dementia.
Measurements:Survey on “Care Planning for Individuals with Dementia.”
Results:The respondents were knowledgeable about dementia and hospice care, indicated the person with dementia would want comfort care at the end stage of illness, and reported high levels of both legal ACP (e.g., living will; 87%) and informal ACP discussions (79%) for the person with dementia. However, notable racial differences were present. Relative to white persons with dementia, African American persons with dementia were reported to have a lower preference for comfort care (81% vs. 58%) and lower rates of completion of legal ACP (89% vs. 73%). Racial differences in ACP and care preferences were also reflected in geographic differences. Additionally, African American study partners had a lower level of knowledge about dementia and reported a greater influence of religious/spiritual beliefs on the desired types of medical treatments. Notably, all respondents indicated that more information about the stages of dementia and end-of-life health care options would be helpful.
Conclusions:Educational programs may be useful in reducing racial differences in attitudes towards ACP. These programs could focus on the clinical course of dementia and issues related to end-of-life care, including the importance of ACP.
Absorption, Translocation, and Metabolism of Metribuzin in Diploid and Tetraploid Soybean (Glycine max) Plants and Cell Cultures
- Ezzaldin O. Abusteit, Frederick T. Corbin, Donald P. Schmitt, Joe W. Burton, A. Douglas Worsham, Lafayette Thompson, Jr.
-
- Journal:
- Weed Science / Volume 33 / Issue 5 / September 1985
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 12 June 2017, pp. 618-628
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Field experiments established that tetraploid soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] plants were relatively tolerant while diploid plants were highly susceptible to metribuzin [4-amino-6-tert-butyl-3-(methylthio)-as-triazin-5(4H)-one] applied both preemergence and postemergence. Sensitivity of diploids and tolerance of tetraploids was also found in growth chamber experiments. Autoradiographs prepared 4 days after 14C-metribuzin application showed a high level of 14C-translocation to all parts of diploid plants including meristems. In contrast, only low levels of 14C were translocated in tetraploid plants, with no 14C-movement into meristems. Tetraploid plants rapidly transformed absorbed metribuzin to nontoxic products. Diploids were incapable of inactivating absorbed metribuzin at a rate sufficient to prevent injury. Differences in absorption, translocation, and metabolism of metribuzin appeared to be the main factors in the diploid and tetraploid differential response in field and growth chamber experiments. Differences in the rate of metribuzin metabolism appeared to be the factor responsible for the differential response in diploid and tetraploid cell suspension cultures. The primary polar metabolites were conjugates of metribuzin and deaminated metribuzin [6-tert-butyl-3-(methylthio)-1,2,4-triazin-5(4H)-one] with a ratio of 8:1, respectively.
Contributors
-
- By Mitchell Aboulafia, Frederick Adams, Marilyn McCord Adams, Robert M. Adams, Laird Addis, James W. Allard, David Allison, William P. Alston, Karl Ameriks, C. Anthony Anderson, David Leech Anderson, Lanier Anderson, Roger Ariew, David Armstrong, Denis G. Arnold, E. J. Ashworth, Margaret Atherton, Robin Attfield, Bruce Aune, Edward Wilson Averill, Jody Azzouni, Kent Bach, Andrew Bailey, Lynne Rudder Baker, Thomas R. Baldwin, Jon Barwise, George Bealer, William Bechtel, Lawrence C. Becker, Mark A. Bedau, Ernst Behler, José A. Benardete, Ermanno Bencivenga, Jan Berg, Michael Bergmann, Robert L. Bernasconi, Sven Bernecker, Bernard Berofsky, Rod Bertolet, Charles J. Beyer, Christian Beyer, Joseph Bien, Joseph Bien, Peg Birmingham, Ivan Boh, James Bohman, Daniel Bonevac, Laurence BonJour, William J. Bouwsma, Raymond D. Bradley, Myles Brand, Richard B. Brandt, Michael E. Bratman, Stephen E. Braude, Daniel Breazeale, Angela Breitenbach, Jason Bridges, David O. Brink, Gordon G. Brittan, Justin Broackes, Dan W. Brock, Aaron Bronfman, Jeffrey E. Brower, Bartosz Brozek, Anthony Brueckner, Jeffrey Bub, Lara Buchak, Otavio Bueno, Ann E. Bumpus, Robert W. Burch, John Burgess, Arthur W. Burks, Panayot Butchvarov, Robert E. Butts, Marina Bykova, Patrick Byrne, David Carr, Noël Carroll, Edward S. Casey, Victor Caston, Victor Caston, Albert Casullo, Robert L. Causey, Alan K. L. Chan, Ruth Chang, Deen K. Chatterjee, Andrew Chignell, Roderick M. Chisholm, Kelly J. Clark, E. J. Coffman, Robin Collins, Brian P. Copenhaver, John Corcoran, John Cottingham, Roger Crisp, Frederick J. Crosson, Antonio S. Cua, Phillip D. Cummins, Martin Curd, Adam Cureton, Andrew Cutrofello, Stephen Darwall, Paul Sheldon Davies, Wayne A. Davis, Timothy Joseph Day, Claudio de Almeida, Mario De Caro, Mario De Caro, John Deigh, C. F. Delaney, Daniel C. Dennett, Michael R. DePaul, Michael Detlefsen, Daniel Trent Devereux, Philip E. Devine, John M. Dillon, Martin C. Dillon, Robert DiSalle, Mary Domski, Alan Donagan, Paul Draper, Fred Dretske, Mircea Dumitru, Wilhelm Dupré, Gerald Dworkin, John Earman, Ellery Eells, Catherine Z. Elgin, Berent Enç, Ronald P. Endicott, Edward Erwin, John Etchemendy, C. Stephen Evans, Susan L. Feagin, Solomon Feferman, Richard Feldman, Arthur Fine, Maurice A. Finocchiaro, William FitzPatrick, Richard E. Flathman, Gvozden Flego, Richard Foley, Graeme Forbes, Rainer Forst, Malcolm R. Forster, Daniel Fouke, Patrick Francken, Samuel Freeman, Elizabeth Fricker, Miranda Fricker, Michael Friedman, Michael Fuerstein, Richard A. Fumerton, Alan Gabbey, Pieranna Garavaso, Daniel Garber, Jorge L. A. Garcia, Robert K. Garcia, Don Garrett, Philip Gasper, Gerald Gaus, Berys Gaut, Bernard Gert, Roger F. Gibson, Cody Gilmore, Carl Ginet, Alan H. Goldman, Alvin I. Goldman, Alfonso Gömez-Lobo, Lenn E. Goodman, Robert M. Gordon, Stefan Gosepath, Jorge J. E. Gracia, Daniel W. Graham, George A. Graham, Peter J. Graham, Richard E. Grandy, I. Grattan-Guinness, John Greco, Philip T. Grier, Nicholas Griffin, Nicholas Griffin, David A. Griffiths, Paul J. Griffiths, Stephen R. Grimm, Charles L. Griswold, Charles B. Guignon, Pete A. Y. Gunter, Dimitri Gutas, Gary Gutting, Paul Guyer, Kwame Gyekye, Oscar A. Haac, Raul Hakli, Raul Hakli, Michael Hallett, Edward C. Halper, Jean Hampton, R. James Hankinson, K. R. Hanley, Russell Hardin, Robert M. Harnish, William Harper, David Harrah, Kevin Hart, Ali Hasan, William Hasker, John Haugeland, Roger Hausheer, William Heald, Peter Heath, Richard Heck, John F. Heil, Vincent F. Hendricks, Stephen Hetherington, Francis Heylighen, Kathleen Marie Higgins, Risto Hilpinen, Harold T. Hodes, Joshua Hoffman, Alan Holland, Robert L. Holmes, Richard Holton, Brad W. Hooker, Terence E. Horgan, Tamara Horowitz, Paul Horwich, Vittorio Hösle, Paul Hoβfeld, Daniel Howard-Snyder, Frances Howard-Snyder, Anne Hudson, Deal W. Hudson, Carl A. Huffman, David L. Hull, Patricia Huntington, Thomas Hurka, Paul Hurley, Rosalind Hursthouse, Guillermo Hurtado, Ronald E. Hustwit, Sarah Hutton, Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa, Harry A. Ide, David Ingram, Philip J. Ivanhoe, Alfred L. Ivry, Frank Jackson, Dale Jacquette, Joseph Jedwab, Richard Jeffrey, David Alan Johnson, Edward Johnson, Mark D. Jordan, Richard Joyce, Hwa Yol Jung, Robert Hillary Kane, Tomis Kapitan, Jacquelyn Ann K. Kegley, James A. Keller, Ralph Kennedy, Sergei Khoruzhii, Jaegwon Kim, Yersu Kim, Nathan L. King, Patricia Kitcher, Peter D. Klein, E. D. Klemke, Virginia Klenk, George L. Kline, Christian Klotz, Simo Knuuttila, Joseph J. Kockelmans, Konstantin Kolenda, Sebastian Tomasz Kołodziejczyk, Isaac Kramnick, Richard Kraut, Fred Kroon, Manfred Kuehn, Steven T. Kuhn, Henry E. Kyburg, John Lachs, Jennifer Lackey, Stephen E. Lahey, Andrea Lavazza, Thomas H. Leahey, Joo Heung Lee, Keith Lehrer, Dorothy Leland, Noah M. Lemos, Ernest LePore, Sarah-Jane Leslie, Isaac Levi, Andrew Levine, Alan E. Lewis, Daniel E. Little, Shu-hsien Liu, Shu-hsien Liu, Alan K. L. Chan, Brian Loar, Lawrence B. Lombard, John Longeway, Dominic McIver Lopes, Michael J. Loux, E. J. Lowe, Steven Luper, Eugene C. Luschei, William G. Lycan, David Lyons, David Macarthur, Danielle Macbeth, Scott MacDonald, Jacob L. Mackey, Louis H. Mackey, Penelope Mackie, Edward H. Madden, Penelope Maddy, G. B. Madison, Bernd Magnus, Pekka Mäkelä, Rudolf A. Makkreel, David Manley, William E. Mann (W.E.M.), Vladimir Marchenkov, Peter Markie, Jean-Pierre Marquis, Ausonio Marras, Mike W. Martin, A. P. Martinich, William L. McBride, David McCabe, Storrs McCall, Hugh J. McCann, Robert N. McCauley, John J. McDermott, Sarah McGrath, Ralph McInerny, Daniel J. McKaughan, Thomas McKay, Michael McKinsey, Brian P. McLaughlin, Ernan McMullin, Anthonie Meijers, Jack W. Meiland, William Jason Melanson, Alfred R. Mele, Joseph R. Mendola, Christopher Menzel, Michael J. Meyer, Christian B. Miller, David W. Miller, Peter Millican, Robert N. Minor, Phillip Mitsis, James A. Montmarquet, Michael S. Moore, Tim Moore, Benjamin Morison, Donald R. Morrison, Stephen J. Morse, Paul K. Moser, Alexander P. D. Mourelatos, Ian Mueller, James Bernard Murphy, Mark C. Murphy, Steven Nadler, Jan Narveson, Alan Nelson, Jerome Neu, Samuel Newlands, Kai Nielsen, Ilkka Niiniluoto, Carlos G. Noreña, Calvin G. Normore, David Fate Norton, Nikolaj Nottelmann, Donald Nute, David S. Oderberg, Steve Odin, Michael O’Rourke, Willard G. Oxtoby, Heinz Paetzold, George S. Pappas, Anthony J. Parel, Lydia Patton, R. P. Peerenboom, Francis Jeffry Pelletier, Adriaan T. Peperzak, Derk Pereboom, Jaroslav Peregrin, Glen Pettigrove, Philip Pettit, Edmund L. Pincoffs, Andrew Pinsent, Robert B. Pippin, Alvin Plantinga, Louis P. Pojman, Richard H. Popkin, John F. Post, Carl J. Posy, William J. Prior, Richard Purtill, Michael Quante, Philip L. Quinn, Philip L. Quinn, Elizabeth S. Radcliffe, Diana Raffman, Gerard Raulet, Stephen L. Read, Andrews Reath, Andrew Reisner, Nicholas Rescher, Henry S. Richardson, Robert C. Richardson, Thomas Ricketts, Wayne D. Riggs, Mark Roberts, Robert C. Roberts, Luke Robinson, Alexander Rosenberg, Gary Rosenkranz, Bernice Glatzer Rosenthal, Adina L. Roskies, William L. Rowe, T. M. Rudavsky, Michael Ruse, Bruce Russell, Lilly-Marlene Russow, Dan Ryder, R. M. Sainsbury, Joseph Salerno, Nathan Salmon, Wesley C. Salmon, Constantine Sandis, David H. Sanford, Marco Santambrogio, David Sapire, Ruth A. Saunders, Geoffrey Sayre-McCord, Charles Sayward, James P. Scanlan, Richard Schacht, Tamar Schapiro, Frederick F. Schmitt, Jerome B. Schneewind, Calvin O. Schrag, Alan D. Schrift, George F. Schumm, Jean-Loup Seban, David N. Sedley, Kenneth Seeskin, Krister Segerberg, Charlene Haddock Seigfried, Dennis M. Senchuk, James F. Sennett, William Lad Sessions, Stewart Shapiro, Tommie Shelby, Donald W. Sherburne, Christopher Shields, Roger A. Shiner, Sydney Shoemaker, Robert K. Shope, Kwong-loi Shun, Wilfried Sieg, A. John Simmons, Robert L. Simon, Marcus G. Singer, Georgette Sinkler, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Matti T. Sintonen, Lawrence Sklar, Brian Skyrms, Robert C. Sleigh, Michael Anthony Slote, Hans Sluga, Barry Smith, Michael Smith, Robin Smith, Robert Sokolowski, Robert C. Solomon, Marta Soniewicka, Philip Soper, Ernest Sosa, Nicholas Southwood, Paul Vincent Spade, T. L. S. Sprigge, Eric O. Springsted, George J. Stack, Rebecca Stangl, Jason Stanley, Florian Steinberger, Sören Stenlund, Christopher Stephens, James P. Sterba, Josef Stern, Matthias Steup, M. A. Stewart, Leopold Stubenberg, Edith Dudley Sulla, Frederick Suppe, Jere Paul Surber, David George Sussman, Sigrún Svavarsdóttir, Zeno G. Swijtink, Richard Swinburne, Charles C. Taliaferro, Robert B. Talisse, John Tasioulas, Paul Teller, Larry S. Temkin, Mark Textor, H. S. Thayer, Peter Thielke, Alan Thomas, Amie L. Thomasson, Katherine Thomson-Jones, Joshua C. Thurow, Vzalerie Tiberius, Terrence N. Tice, Paul Tidman, Mark C. Timmons, William Tolhurst, James E. Tomberlin, Rosemarie Tong, Lawrence Torcello, Kelly Trogdon, J. D. Trout, Robert E. Tully, Raimo Tuomela, John Turri, Martin M. Tweedale, Thomas Uebel, Jennifer Uleman, James Van Cleve, Harry van der Linden, Peter van Inwagen, Bryan W. Van Norden, René van Woudenberg, Donald Phillip Verene, Samantha Vice, Thomas Vinci, Donald Wayne Viney, Barbara Von Eckardt, Peter B. M. Vranas, Steven J. Wagner, William J. Wainwright, Paul E. Walker, Robert E. Wall, Craig Walton, Douglas Walton, Eric Watkins, Richard A. Watson, Michael V. Wedin, Rudolph H. Weingartner, Paul Weirich, Paul J. Weithman, Carl Wellman, Howard Wettstein, Samuel C. Wheeler, Stephen A. White, Jennifer Whiting, Edward R. Wierenga, Michael Williams, Fred Wilson, W. Kent Wilson, Kenneth P. Winkler, John F. Wippel, Jan Woleński, Allan B. Wolter, Nicholas P. Wolterstorff, Rega Wood, W. Jay Wood, Paul Woodruff, Alison Wylie, Gideon Yaffe, Takashi Yagisawa, Yutaka Yamamoto, Keith E. Yandell, Xiaomei Yang, Dean Zimmerman, Günter Zoller, Catherine Zuckert, Michael Zuckert, Jack A. Zupko (J.A.Z.)
- Edited by Robert Audi, University of Notre Dame, Indiana
-
- Book:
- The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy
- Published online:
- 05 August 2015
- Print publication:
- 27 April 2015, pp ix-xxx
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
CERAD practice effects and attrition bias in a dementia prevention trial
- Melissa Mathews, Erin Abner, Allison Caban-Holt, Richard Kryscio, Frederick Schmitt
-
- Journal:
- International Psychogeriatrics / Volume 25 / Issue 7 / July 2013
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 10 April 2013, pp. 1115-1123
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Background: The Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD) set of tests is frequently used for tracking cognition longitudinally in both clinical and research settings. Repeated cognitive assessments are an important component in measuring such changes; however, practice effects and attrition bias may obscure significant clinical change over time. The current study sought to examine the presence and magnitude of practice effects and the role of attrition bias in a sample of cognitively normal older men enrolled in a prevention trial.
Method: Participants were grouped according to whether they completed five years of follow-up (n = 182) or less (n = 126). Practice effects were examined in these participants as a whole (n = 308) and by group.
Results: Findings indicate that moderate practice effects exist in both groups on the CERAD T-score and that attrition bias likely does not play a contributing role in improved scores over time.
Conclusion: The current study provides additional evidence and support for previous findings that repeated cognitive assessment results in rising test scores in longitudinally collected data and demonstrates that these findings are unlikely to be due to attrition.
Introduction: The History of Social Epistemology
- Frederick F. Schmitt, Oliver R. Scholz
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Social epistemology is a burgeoning branch of contemporary epistemology. Since the 1970s, philosophers have taken an ever-increasing interest in such topics as the epistemic value of testimony, the nature and function of expertise, the proper distribution of cognitive labor and resources among individuals in communities, and the status of group reasoning and knowledge. This trend emerged against the resistance of the widely shared view that social considerations are largely irrelevant to epistemological concerns. The trend was stimulated by diverse approaches to the study of knowledge, in such fields as library science, educational theory, the sociology of science, and economics, and within philosophy itself, in the decades preceding the 1980s. To name only a few influences within philosophy, W. V. Quine promoted a naturalistic approach to knowledge, and many who accepted the relevance of nature to epistemology found it sensible to accept the relevance of social factors as well. Thomas S. Kuhn suggested that social factors precipitate revolutionary conceptual and doctrinal changes in the history of science. And feminist epistemologists uncovered the importance of gender differences in knowledge – a species of social factor.
What Are the Aims of Education?
- Frederick Schmitt
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Theorists of education have long debated the ultimate aims of education, often proposing one or another cognitive aim, such as true belief or critical thinking. I will argue first that there are no ultimate aims common to all kinds of education, apart from the vacuous ones of transmitting cognition and improving the student's cognition. In light of this conclusion, the matter to investigate is the ultimate aims of certain broad kinds of education. I will restrict my inquiry here to cognitive ultimate aims, and I will focus on liberal arts education. I will propose that the organizing cognitive ultimate aim of liberal arts education is justified belief rather than true belief.
Introduction: Epistemic Relativism
- Frederick F. Schmitt
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
This issue of Episteme is devoted to the topic of epistemic relativism. It includes a symposium on Paul Boghossian's treatment of epistemic relativism in chapters 5 through 7 of his new book, Fear of Knowledge (2006). The symposium centers on Boghossian's argument against epistemic relativism in chapter 6 of that book. In their contributions to the symposium, Gideon Rosen and Ram Neta offer criticisms of Boghossian's argument, and Neta argues for a version of epistemic relativism. In addition to the symposium, Jonathan Weinberg, Michael Williams, and Roger White supply stand-alone articles on related topics. The purpose of this introduction is to situate epistemic relativism in the constellation of relativist views, to distinguish several forms of epistemic relativism, and to remark briefly on how the versions of relativism discussed in the articles in this issue fit these forms of relativism.