Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:01:35.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Attrition in Longitudinal Data is Primarily Selective with Respect to Level Rather than Rate of Change

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 May 2019

Timothy A. Salthouse
Timothy A. Salthouse*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA
*
Correspondence and reprint requests to: Timothy A. Salthouse, Department of Psychology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: An important question in longitudinal research is whether the individuals who discontinue participation differ in their level of, or their change in, cognitive functioning relative to individuals who return for subsequent occasions. Methods: Performance in five cognitive domains was examined in nearly 5000 participants between 18 and 85 years of age who completed between one and five longitudinal occasions. Results: Little or no differences in cognitive performance were apparent between young adults who did or did not return for subsequent longitudinal occasions. However, among adults above about 45 years of age, returning participants had higher levels of cognitive performance, but approximately similar magnitude of longitudinal change, as participants completing fewer occasions. Conclusions: These results suggest that generalizability of longitudinal comparisons may be restricted to individuals with relatively high levels of cognitive functioning, but that rates of cognitive change are nearly comparable for individuals completing different numbers of longitudinal occasions.

Keywords

AgingCognitionMethodsDeclineDropoutAdults
Type
Regular Research
Information
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society , Volume 25 , Issue 6 , July 2019 , pp. 618 - 623
Copyright
Copyright © INS. Published by Cambridge University Press, 2019. 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Chatfield, M.D., Brayne, C.E., & Matthews, F.E. (2005). A systematic literature review of attrition between waves in longitudinal studies in the elderly shows a consistent pattern of drop out between differing studies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 58, 13–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooney, T.M., Schaie, K.W., & Willis, S.L. (1988). The relationship between prior functioning on cognitive and personality dimensions and subject attrition in longitudinal research. Journal of Gerontology, 43, P12–P17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Folstein, M.F., Folstein, S.E., & McHugh, P.R. (1975). Mini-mental state: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kennison, R.F. & Zelinski, E.M. (2005). Estimating age change in list recall in Asset and Health Dynamics of the oldest-old: The effects of attrition bias and missing data treatment. Psychology and Aging, 20, 460–475.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matthews, F.E., Chatfield, M., Freeman, C., McCracken, C., & Brayne, C. (2004). Attrition and bias in the MRC cognitive function and ageing study: an epidemiological investigation. BMC Public Health, 4, 12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rabbitt, P., Lunn, M., Wong, D., & Cobain, M. (2008). Age and ability affect practice gains in longitudinal studies of cognitive change. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 63B, P235–P240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riegel, K.F., Riegel, R.M., & Meyer, G. (1968). The prediction of retest resisters in research on aging. Journal of Gerontology, 23, 370–374.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salthouse, T.A. (2010). Influence of age on practice effects in longitudinal neurocognitive change. Neuropsychology, 24, 563–572.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salthouse, T.A. (2014a). Selectivity of attrition in longitudinal studies of cognitive functioning. Journals of Gerontology: Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 69, 567–574.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salthouse, T.A. (2014b). Correlates of cognitive change. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 1026–1048.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salthouse, T.A. (2018). Why is cognitive change more negative with increased age? Neuropsychology, 32, 110–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salthouse, T.A., Pink, J.E., & Tucker-Drob, E.M. (2008). Contextual analysis of fluid intelligence. Intelligence, 36, 464–486.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schaie, K.W., Labouvie, G.V., & Barrett, T.J. (1973). Selective attrition effects in a fourteen-year study of adult intelligence. Journal of Gerontology, 28, 328–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siegler, I.C. & Botwinick, J. (1979). A long-term longitudinal study of intellectual ability of older adults: The matter of selective subject attrition. Journal of Gerontology, 34, 242–245.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Siegler, I.C., McCarty, S.M., & Logue, P.E. (1982). Wechsler memory scale scores, selective attrition, and distance from death. Journal of Gerontology, 37, 176–181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Beijsterveldt, C.E.M., van Boxtel, M.P.J., Bosma, H., Houx, P.J., Buntinx, F., & Jolles, J. (2002). Predictors of attrition in a longitudinal cognitive aging study: The Maastricht Aging Study (MAAS). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 55, 216–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar