![Sample our Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing & Allied Health journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5944/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Medicine-Dentistry-Nursing-Allied-Health.jpg"})
Abstract
The goal of the current project was to examine whether engaging in social activity may moderate or mediate the relation between age and cognitive functioning. A large age range sample of adults performed a variety of cognitive tests and completed a social activities questionnaire. Results did not support the moderator hypothesis, as age differences in cognition were similar in people who reported low and high levels of engagement in social activity. However, the data was consistent with a mediation model, which posits that age differences in social activity partly explain age differences in cognition. Furthermore, it supported a moderated mediation model, which assumes that the mediation effects of social activity were stronger at older ages.
Notes
Notes. Average scaled score is the average of the age-adjusted scores for the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Third Edition (Wechsler, Citation1997) Block Design, Symbol Search, Letter-Number sequencing, and Matrix Reasoning subtests. Health was self-reported on a scale ranging from 1 (poor) to 10 (excellent). Anxiety was assessed with the State version of the State-Trait Anxiety questionnaire (STAI; Spielberger, Gorsush, Lushene, & Jacobs, Citation1983). *p < .05; **p < .01.
Notes. The bootstrapping procedure described by Preacher et al. (Citation2007) was used to estimate indirect effects and generate 95% confidence intervals for those effects. Unstandardized regression coefficients are reported. SE are standard errors for the unstandardized indirect effects.
Bootstrap sample size = 1,000. 95% CI are bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals for the indirect effect; LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit.
The model was bias-corrected and accelerated, but results were unchanged when using a noncorrected model or a bias-corrected model.
Note. The bootstrapping procedure described by Preacher et al. (Citation2007) was used to estimate indirect effects and generate 95% confidence intervals for those effects. Unstandardized regression coefficients are reported. SE are standard errors.
Bootstrap sample size = 1,000. 95% CI are bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals for the indirect effect; LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit.
The model was bias-corrected and accelerated, but results were unchanged when using a noncorrected model or a bias-corrected model.