AI Article Synopsis
- Temporal stability of individual differences in neurocognition is crucial for understanding relationships with real-world behaviors like substance abuse and mental health issues.
- The study assessed neurocognitive changes in a diverse group of adolescents over two years, finding significant performance improvements with age, particularly in tasks related to pattern recognition and crystallized cognition.
- While certain measures showed good stability, the findings suggest that some observed changes might be influenced by practice effects or differences in testing conditions, highlighting the need for careful interpretation of longitudinal data in neurocognitive development.
Article Abstract
Temporal stability of individual differences is an important prerequisite for accurate tracking of prospective relationships between neurocognition and real-world behavioral outcomes such as substance abuse and psychopathology. Here we report age-related changes and longitudinal test-retest stability (TRS) for the Neurocognition battery of the Adolescent Brain and Cognitive Development (ABCD) study, which included the NIH Toolbox (TB) Cognitive Domain and additional memory and visuospatial processing tests administered at baseline (ages 9-11) and two-year follow-up. As expected, performance improved significantly with age, but the effect size varied broadly, with Pattern Comparison and the Crystallized Cognition Composite showing the largest age-related gain (Cohen's d:.99 and.97, respectively). TRS ranged from fair (Flanker test: r = 0.44) to excellent (Crystallized Cognition Composite: r = 0.82). A comparison of longitudinal changes and cross-sectional age-related differences within baseline and follow-up assessments suggested that, for some measures, longitudinal changes may be confounded by practice effects and differences in task stimuli or procedure between baseline and follow-up. In conclusion, a subset of measures showed good stability of individual differences despite significant age-related changes, warranting their use as prospective predictors. However, caution is needed in the interpretation of observed longitudinal changes as indicators of neurocognitive development.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9019835 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2022.101078 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!