Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

SuperAging deserves special attention from researchers in the field of the psychology of aging, because it denotes the preservation of multiple cognitive abilities in very old age. Currently, very little is known about lifestyle factors that could be related to SuperAging. The main goal of the present narrative review was to bring together available evidence involving social factors related to SuperAging and to target avenues for future research. The review summarizes the findings of studies published between 2005 and 2022. Low social participation in midlife age and high social participation in older age were found to be related to SuperAging. In contrast, social network size and diversity did not differ between SuperAgers and cognitively normal older adults. The synthesis of the results indicates that having positive, close, high-quality relationships and a high frequency of social contact may be considered to be hypothetical predictors of superior cognitive performance in later life.

Plain Language Summary

The study provides the overview of empirical research involving social factors related to SuperAging, that is, the preservation of cognitive abilities in very old age. The review summarizes the findings of studies published between 2005 and 2022. Less frequent social contact in midlife and more frequent social contact in older age were found to be related to SuperAging. In contrast, social network size and diversity did not differ between SuperAgers and cognitively normal older adults. The synthesis of the results indicates that having positive, close, high-quality relationships and a frequent social contact predict better cognition in very old age.

Keywords

SuperAging cognition cognitive abilities social older adults

Introduction

Successful cognitive aging is closely related to the absence of cognitive decline that could be diagnosed as a mild cognitive impairment or dementia in late adulthood. Apparently, successful cognitive aging is very desirable to be reached. Many researchers are working in this field to reveal what factors influence successful aging, which older adults show signs of cognitive decline and which show relatively healthy cognitive functioning. Maximizing the functional ability and maintenance of good cognitive function in older adults is also recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO, 2017). For these reasons, the attention of researchers in this field is ever more focused on investigating older adults with very well-preserved cognitive abilities.

The phenomenon of SuperAging belongs to a very recent and highly topical issue in the field of psychology of aging. SuperAgers are adults older than 80 years of age who show very good cognitive abilities, especially a superior memory (Harrison et al., 2012). A SuperAger is primarily defined as an older adult who has superior episodic memory compared to normative values of younger adults (Gefen et al., 2014). Borelli et al. (2018) later widened the definition of these cognitively high-performing older adults to also consider superior performance in further cognitive domains, such as executive functioning, inhibitory control or regulation of attention. Therefore, SuperAgers are sometimes called cognitively elite older adults (Saint Martin et al., 2017).

In comparison to the relatively new research on SuperAging, the opposite end of cognitive aging spectrum, that is, neurodegeneration and dementia, has been a matter of substantial research up to now. Bio-psycho-social lifestyle-related factors for dementia have been revealed, and it was also shown, for example, that low social contact belongs among the 12 risk factors recently identified (Livingston et al., 2020; Weber, 2016). In contrast to these findings, the lifestyle factors that could be related to the preservation of high-functioning cognitive abilities in older age are less investigated (but see Ihle et al., 2020; Yu et al., 2020). This issue is, however, highly topical, because the findings from this field can be practically utilized in lifestyle counseling as well as in the planning of public health policy for the aging population. Moreover, the phenomenon of SuperAging demonstrates not only the possibility of preserving high cognitive functioning in very late life but may even weaken some negative stereotypes about the aging population in general (Keating, 2022; Maccora et al., 2021).

The present study focuses specifically on the social factors that may be considered as being protective against age-related cognitive decline or that can support the preservation of multiple cognitive abilities in older adulthood (Ybarra et al., 2008). To our knowledge, no review focused on social factors in SuperAgers has been published so far, although some interesting insights are provided by Fratiglioni et al. (2004) and Zahodne (2021). The first of these two studies summarizes the findings of longitudinal studies investigating the effects of social, mental and physical lifestyle components on cognition, also taking into consideration their protective effects against dementia. “Social support, social influence, social engagement, person-to-person contact and access to resources” were found to be social lifestyle components that affect people behaviorally, psychologically and physically (Fratiglioni et al., 2004, p. 349). Social engagement in particular was found to be related to better mental and physical health (Bath & Gardiner, 2005; Bennett, 2005). In contrast, a poor social network and a lack of social activity were found to worsen cognitive functioning and increase the risk of dementia. Taken together, the findings summarized in the above-mentioned reviews show that an active social lifestyle has a positive effect on cognition in later life.

Furthermore, the review by Zahodne (2021) also provides some interesting insights into the psychosocial protective factors in cognitive aging. The study focuses on perceived control, religious involvement and social relations. Greater perceived control, which might be modifiable by experience, seems to help with building a cognitive reserve and thus being connected with better cognition in older age (Zahodne, 2021). Social relations have been studied by the mentioned author in the life course approach looking at social network structure, its function and quality. Friendship in general was found to play a key role in developing a cognitive reserve and thus may have high potential to optimize cognitive aging. Moreover, more frequent interactions with non-family members, that is, friends, were found to be the strongest predictor of better memory aging in the study by Zahodne et al. (2019). In contrast to the impact of frequent interactions with friends, the frequency of interactions with family members was not found to be uniquely associated with memory aging (Zahodne, 2021).

Aside from the above-mentioned empirical evidence, the link between cognitive performance and social factors is also considered in the theory of psychological aging. For example, Kelly et al. (2017) suggest that social activities are a type of cognitive stimulation that support cognitive performance in later life through building a cognitive reserve, that is, the brain’s resilience built through mental stimulation and life experiences, which helps delay cognitive decline. Furthermore, within the context of the cognitive enrichment approach, social activities are suggested to contribute to the maintenance of cognitive performance in late adulthood because these contexts are cognitively demanding and thus represent opportunities for cognitive enrichment (Bourassa et al., 2017). Taken together, interacting with others in one’s social network may be generally expected to be beneficial for a subject’s cognition.

Nevertheless, more theoretical development is needed in this field because there is an insufficient differentiation between variables of social life. General terms, such as sociality, social activities or social engagement, are commonly used in the literature. However, these general terms may indeed mean and cover more indicators of the social life of older adults. There are structural variables of social life, such as social network size and social network composition, and these variables inform us about the size and structure of social network, but they do not convey any information about the quality of social relationships. However, the mere quality of the social contact may be a key aspect for cognitive enrichment, because close relationships enable older adults to disclose their deep concerns and worries. Importantly, Kelly et al. (2017) expect that different aspects of social life may affect cognitive domains in different ways. While social support is suggested to have a buffering effect on stress and may thus consequently affect memory and executive functioning, social interactions are expected to influence reasoning, attention and processing speed.

All these theoretical insights point to the fact that human social life is a multidimensional, highly complex phenomenon, involves various aspects and affects human cognition in different ways. Therefore, distinguishing between different aspects of social life is important for a better understanding of the link between cognitive performance and social life in late adulthood.

As mentioned above, a review on SuperAging and its relations to social life is missing. SuperAging is a relatively new concept, and the summarization of results would be very helpful for targeting future research. Since the prevalence of cognitive impairments is increasing, it is necessary to search for strategies on how to decrease the socioeconomic burden and support cognitive function preservation in the older population. Non-pharmacological interventions in particular are highly appreciated because they do not have the side effects of medications on the health of older adults. In this perspective, an increase in the number of SuperAgers in the population may also have important socioeconomic effects. For all these reasons, the present study aims to summarize and synthesize the findings from the available studies focused on the social life of SuperAgers/cognitively elite older adults. New avenues for future research are formulated in the Discussion section of the present study.

Methods

The main question of the present narrative review was: What factors of social life may be related to SuperAging? Thus, the present review summarizes and synthesizes the empirical results of studies that investigated social variables in older adults with excellent cognitive abilities. Based on this empirical evidence, several avenues for future studies were determined, and some controversies in the past findings discussed.

In order to capture the relevant empirical literature, the authors conducted a search of the scientific literature in the Web of Science, PubMed and Google Scholar databases. Following the above-mentioned main question of the review, the key words “SuperAging,”“SuperAgers,” and “social” combined in various ways using “AND” and “OR” operators were used for search.

The following inclusion criteria were used for the present review: (a) the article was published between January 2005 and December 2022 in a scientific peer-reviewed journal; (b) the article presents empirical quantitative or qualitative research evidence (longitudinal or cross-sectional) gathered in SuperAgers/cognitively elite older adults; (c) the article presents empirical quantitative or qualitative research evidence (longitudinal or cross-sectional) mapping a domain (or domains) of the social life or social activities of SuperAgers/cognitively elite older adults; (d) the article is written in English; and (e) a full-text version of the article is available.

The exclusion criteria were: (a) the article was published in 2004 or earlier; (b) the article was published in other than a scientific peer-reviewed journal (e.g., a Master’s thesis, grey literature); (c) the article presents only evidence gathered in subjects with cognitive impairment/dementia; (d) the article does not provide data about the cognitive performance of older adults; (e) the article is not written in English; and (f) a full-text version of the article is not available.

An additional literature search was conducted via a backward and forward snowballing strategy. In other words, the reference lists of the retrieved manuscripts were scanned for relevant sources. These sources were later retrieved and scanned for relevance. Forward tracking was conducted using the “Times cited” tool provided by the Web of Science and “Cited by” tool provided by Google Scholar. The relevant sources were then retrieved.

The database searches generated 152 occurrences (Figure 1). The titles of records were screened and duplicates were removed. The titles and abstracts of the remaining sources were then scanned for relevance independently by two evaluators (the authors of this review). The source was considered to be relevant for the purpose of the present review if it met all the inclusion criteria (see above). The two evaluators reached agreement in all the evaluated sources. Based on this scanning, only nine empirical articles dealing with the social life of SuperAgers/cognitively elite older adults were found. Their full texts were retrieved, and all the articles were read to verify whether all the inclusion criteria were present. All nine of these articles met the inclusion criteria.

Figure 1.

PRISMA diagram.

In the next stage, a focused excerpting of the retrieved articles was conducted concentrating on empirical findings that considered both measurements of cognitive functions and social variables. For the purpose of the present review, the empirical findings were grouped into the following categories: social network size and diversity, social participation in midlife, and social participation in older adulthood. The main insights within each group of findings are presented in the following subsections (see also Table 1).

Table 1.

Summary Table.

Citation	Methodology	Location	Sample size	Social measure	Cognitive measure	Findings
Calandri et al. (2020)	A cross-sectional study	Argentina	N = 40	Social network index (network size and diversity)	SA, according to the Northwestern University SuperAging Program criteria.	The results revealed no difference in social network size and diversity between SuperAgers and cognitively normal older adults.
Cook Maher et al. (2017)	A cross-sectional study	USA	N = 50	Positive relations with others	SA, according to the Northwestern University SuperAging Program criteria	SA had significantly higher levels of positive relationships with others compared to CA.
de Frias and Dixon (2014)	A longitudinal study	Canada	N = 501	Social activity	CE, CN, CI (perceptual speed, inductive reasoning, episodic memory, verbal fluency, vocabulary) executive function (inhibition, shifting, updating)	The CI group with a high level of social participation achieved similar results as the CN group on executive functions.
García-Chanes et al. (2022)	A longitudinal study	Mexico	N = 590	Social and recreational activity	Memory, orientation, language, attention, constructional praxis, executive function	Participation in recreational and social activities was found to predict successful memory aging.
Maccora et al. (2021)	A cross-sectional study	Australia	N = 1,679	Social activity (positive exchanges, negative exchanges, participation)	SA (memory—immediate and delayed recall, general cognition)	Neither positive nor negative social exchange was a predictor of SA. Participation in social activities was related to SA, but only in men.
Miceli et al. (2019)	A longitudinal study	Europe	N = 31,954	Social network (size, composition, satisfaction, proximity, closeness), number of activities	Memory—immediate and delayed recall, semantic verbal fluency	Satisfaction with one’s social network and involvement in non-professional social activities seem to be essential to maintaining cognitive function in old age.
Saint Martin et al. (2017)	A longitudinal study	France	N = 543	Social activity	CE, CN, CI (information processing speed, attentional performance, executive function, memory)	The results demonstrated a connection between cognitive performance and social engagement, particularly among the CE group.
Yang et al. (2022)	A cross-sectional study	China	N = 1,347	Late-life leisure activity (mental, physical and social activity)	SCA, MCI, CNC (memory, attention, visuospatial ability, and executive function)	Results revealed that SCA group benefited more from early-life cognitive factors, whereas MCI group benefited from a combination of late-life leisure activities and early-life cognitive attributes.
Yu et al. (2020)	A cross-sectional study	USA	N = 693	Social activity	Immediate memory, delayed memory, language, attention, visuospatial/construction	Super cognition group significantly less participated in social activities.

Note. SA = SuperAgers; CA = cognitively average; CE = cognitively elite; CN = cognitively normal; CI = cognitively impaired; SCA = successful cognitive aging; MCI = mild cognitive impairment; CNC = cognitively normal control.

Results

Social Network Size and Diversity

The structural variables of social life involve mostly a subject’s social network size and social network composition. These variables inform us about the richness of social contact in terms of the number of social actors with which a subject maintains long-term social relationships.

The Argentinian study by Calandri et al. (2020) measured social network size and diversity using the Social Network Index (Cohen et al., 1997), which assesses participation in 12 types of social relationships, such as spouses, children, neighbors, friends, etc. Only those relationships where respondents reported talking to someone at least once every 2 weeks were considered. The authors aimed to determine whether social network size and diversity, among other factors, influenced exceptional memory performance in participants over 80 years old. The results revealed no difference in social network size and diversity between SuperAgers and cognitively normal older adults.

Social Participation in Midlife

Higher participation in social activities is a variable of social life that may be expected to be related to SuperAging. Participation in social activities may stimulate cognitive processing of a subject and thus contribute to the preservation of cognitive abilities in later life. Previous research investigated participation in social activities both in midlife and in older adulthood (see the next subsection).

Yu et al. (2020) investigated the frequency of participation in social activities in midlife in SuperAgers and cognitively normal older adults. The method of retrospective recall of previous lifestyle habits was used in this study. The frequency of participation in social activities was measured by the question “How often did you participate in social activities at around the age of 45?” Surprisingly and counterintuitively, “the super-cognition group, relative to the normal participants, reported significantly less frequent participation in social activities, as well as more frequent instances of working more than 9 hr a day and feeling more stressed” (Yu et al., 2020, p. 5). The results of this study are very interesting, because they showed that a lower frequency of participation in social activities in midlife could be a predictor of superior cognitive abilities in older adulthood.

Social Participation in Older Adulthood

Maccora et al. (2021) investigated the impact of participation in social activities in the last 6 months on superior memory in SuperAgers, as well as in a cognitively normal sample of older adults aged 68 to 74 years within the framework of the Wave 3 of the Australian Personality and Total Health Through Life (PATH) Cohort Study. Participation in social activities in the last 6 months, for example, attending religious services, participating in club activities, helping others with their personal problems or working as a volunteer, was found to be related to superior memory recall, but only in men (see also Philippe, 2022 for how memories can guide actions and behaviors). Men also showed a greater variability in the engagement in social activities than women. In contrast, neither total positive social exchanges per week nor negative social exchanges per week in the last 6 months were found to be predictors of superior memory. Thus, this study showed that the frequency of participation in social activities may be a supportive factor for the preservation of memory for men in later life, but not for women.

The study by Cook Maher et al. (2017) was conducted on SuperAgers and cognitively normal older adults in the USA. This study was primarily focused on well-being, but one of the measured domains of well-being also included positive relations to others. SuperAgers had more positive relations to others when compared to cognitively normal older adults.

In contrast, a Czech study showed no differences between SuperAgers and cognitively normal older adults in terms of time allocated to social activities in the last 2 years (Heissler et al., 2021). Furthermore, a moderate correlation between time allocated to social and other leisure cognitive activities was found. This study had a small proportion of SuperAgers in the sample (N = 19), which was acknowledged as a limitation preventing the generalizability of these findings.

The study by García-Chanes et al. (2022) was conducted as part of a longitudinal project by the Mexican Health and Aging Study (MHAS). Participating older adults between 55 and 75 years of age were divided into three groups: successful memory agers, average memory agers, and adults with memory impairment. Participation in recreational and social activities, including taking care of older people, taking care of children, voluntary work, training, attending sports events, reading, playing board games, talking to people, and doing crafts, was found to predict successful memory aging in this study.

A study by de Frias and Dixon (2014) examined the effect of lifestyle factors on the state of executive function in older adults. Participants (53–90 years old) were taken from the Victoria Longitudinal Study, Canada (VLS; Dixon & de Frias, 2004). Data were obtained from two time periods 4.5 years apart. At baseline, participants were divided into three groups: cognitively elite, cognitively normal and cognitively impaired based on their performance in several cognitive domains. Six tests from the VLS neuropsychological battery were used to assess executive functions, specifically inhibition, shifting and updating. Frequency of engagement (from never to daily) in seven types of social activities in the last 2 years was self-reported in the VLS Activity Lifestyle Questionnaire. Social engagement moderated cognitive differences in executive function, particularly in the cognitively impaired group. The results supported the social engagement hypothesis that higher social activity among older adults is associated with better executive functions. However, engagement in social activities showed no association with cognitive maintenance over time in any of the three groups.

In contrast, the Prognostic Indicator of Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Events project in France revealed the important impact of participation in social activities on the preservation of cognitive abilities in later age. Saint Martin et al. (2017) focused on an active lifestyle, specifically the physical, intellectual and social activities performed in the last 2 years, and its impact on three cognitive abilities (information processing speed and attentional performance, executive function, and memory). The cognitive abilities of retired volunteers were examined twice, at the age of 67 and again later at the age of 75. Participants at 75 years of age were examined for cognitive abilities and completed lifestyle questionnaires involving the frequency of social activity engagement using the Social Activity Index (SAI). The sample was divided into three groups—the cognitively elite (CE), cognitively normal and cognitively impaired—at both evaluations. “CE subjects had scores above the mean for each of the three cognitive domains” (Saint Martin et al., 2017, p. 638). The results revealed a positive association between cognitive performance and frequency of participation in social activities in the past 2 years. In particular, the CE group engaged more frequently in social activities than other groups. This indicates that the more an individual participated in social activities, the better cognitive performance he/she showed in later life. In contrast to some of the previously mentioned studies, no gender differences were found. Although this study did not involve CE participants older than 80 years, the CE group showed the highest social engagement, which indicates that social engagement may be a significant factor in maintaining cognitive functions. These results suggested that “cognitive stability, a sign of successful aging, may be dependent on the interplay between individual cognitive reserve and a socially engaged lifestyle” (Saint Martin et al., 2017, p. 643).

The impact of participating in social activities on cognitive aging is hard to distinguish in the study of Yang et al. (2022). The authors grouped together the impact of mental, physical, and social activities and worked with an aggregate variable “late-life leisure activity.” For this reason, the impact of social activities alone cannot be recognized.

Discussion

The present review showed that empirical evidence in the field of social characteristics of SuperAgers is sparse. This situation calls for the revealing of gaps that could be avenues for future research. The following subsections aim to do just that while discussing the available results with other related findings in the field of psychology of aging.

Quality of Social Relationship Versus Social Network Size and Diversity

Recent research indicates that social network size and diversity do not play a key role in the preservation of cognitive abilities in very old age (Calandri et al., 2020). At the same time, SuperAgers were found to have more positive relations with others when compared to cognitively normal older adults (Cook Maher et al., 2017). The later finding stressed the important role of the quality of social relationships for SuperAging. In this context, the study by Miceli et al. (2019) also showed that satisfaction with one’s social network had a positive effect on the preservation of cognitive function in older people over time. This study explored the influence of various social factors, including social network size and diversity, on several aspects of cognitive function, in particular, immediate and delayed verbal recall tests and semantic verbal fluency over time. Data from healthy participants over 50 years old collected in two-time waves from the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) were used in this study.

Taken together, it seems that mostly the quality of social relationships in later age may be a social variable with a positive impact on the preservation of cognitive abilities in very old age. In contrast, structural variables, such as a subject’s social network size and social network composition, do not seem to play a key role. Future research should reveal whether older adults having positive, close, high-quality relationships also tend to show very good cognitive performance.

Low Social Participation in Midlife Versus High Social Participation in Older Age

Interestingly, SuperAgers reported lower social participation in midlife when compared to cognitively normal older adults (Yu et al., 2020). This finding is counterintuitive and in contrast to findings of another study showing higher social participation in older adulthood to be positively related to SuperAging (Maccora et al., 2021). When seeking a possible interpretation of this contrast, further findings from the study of Yu et al. (2020) should also be considered. Aside from less frequent participation in social activities, SuperAgers also reported more frequent work and more frequent instances of feeling stressed. These results may indicate that SuperAgers spend a lot of time working and that they also chose more stressful jobs in their midlife. One may hypothesize that spending a lot of time in busy work in midlife may be highly stimulating for the brain, may stimulate the building of a cognitive reserve and may also prevent later cognitive decline. This hypothesis may inspire future research.

In contrast to midlife, higher social participation may be hypothesized to be highly stimulating for the brain in older adulthood. In this period of life, many older adults are retired and do not spend much time in jobs at all. Therefore, social contact may be much more important for the preservation of cognitive abilities in this developmental stage. This assumption is also supported by the following findings showing a positive impact of social contact on the preservation of cognitive abilities in various populations of older adults.

A study by Liu et al. (2020) investigated the impact of different areas of lifestyle domains and healthy living on cognitive function. Participants were over 65 years of age with no signs of dementia, although their overall cognitive performance was rather low. Social activities were assessed using two questions related to engagement in social activities during a typical week and participation in formal or informal group activities. A “yes, at least 3 days in a week” answer to either of these questions was counted as being active. This study found a small but positive effect of participation in social activities on cognitive ability in women, as women were more socially active.

Furthermore, Mousavi-Nasab et al. (2014) explored the relationships between different types of social and cognitive activities and episodic as well as semantic memory. Participants (65–85 years old) completed a questionnaire regarding leisure activities and performed several tests measuring episodic and semantic memory three times over 10 years. More frequent participation in social activities showed positive impacts on episodic memory. Interestingly, no significant relationship was found between participation in social activities and the state of semantic memory (tests of Vocabulary and Verbal Fluency). However, social engagement was found to be a predictor of better episodic memory in a long-term perspective. This is relevant in our context because excellent episodic memory is one of the characteristics of SuperAging.

It is important to note that social engagement encompasses multiple aspects. Krueger et al. (2009) examined the relationship between social network size, frequency of social activities, and cognitive ability. Although not differentiated into SuperAgers versus non-SuperAgers, at least half of the participants were at the age of 80 or older, and all participants were without dementia. The frequency of social activity was measured by asking how often during the past year participants took part in six typical activities (restaurants/sporting events, trips, visits, unpaid volunteer work). Cognitive abilities were measured using 19 performance tests, seven of which tested episodic memory. The results showed a positive effect of social activity and social support on cognitive performance. Particularly, a higher frequency of social activity was associated with higher performance in several cognitive domains, such as episodic memory, semantic memory, working memory, processing speed and visuospatial ability.

Interestingly, some studies also indicate that the impact of frequency of social contact on cognition may weaken in very old age. The longitudinal Spanish study by Béland et al. (2005) investigated the impact of frequency of social contact with family members on the state of cognitive functions. Both social contact and the state of cognitive functions were monitored from the age of 65 years in all participants. Even though this study did not analyze the super-cognition group specifically, participants who had more frequent contact with relatives, including extended family members, and had a higher number of relatives seen at least monthly “maintained better cognitive function up until 80 years of age than respondents with lower levels of both these social indicators” (Béland et al., 2005, p. 326). Interestingly, this difference diminished and these social indicators did not play a significant role for the preservation of cognitive abilities after the age of 80. As seen from this brief overview, there are inconsistencies in findings across studies, and therefore this calls for conducting further research in this field.

The Impact of Social Support

Social support, that is, receiving assistance, help or care from the others, is a candidate for being a further social variable possibly influencing cognitive aging in older adulthood. There is research showing an important role of social support for cognitive aging (but see also the findings of Kats et al. (2016), who showed that higher social support was associated with greater global cognitive functioning in midlife but did not predict a change in global cognitive function into older adulthood 20 years later). Unfortunately, these studies did not distinguish between a super-cognition/cognitively elite group in their population samples of older adults. However, their main results are at least briefly introduced in this subsection to indicate an important avenue for future research on the impact of various social characteristics for the preservation of cognitive abilities in older adulthood.

A study by Gow et al. (2013) explored the relationship between social support and cognitive abilities in 70-year-old participants. Perceived social support was operationalized as the level of support received and the participant’s level of satisfaction with this support. In the cognitive domain, memory, intelligence (IQ) and processing speed were measured. Perceived social support was found to be related to all measured cognitive abilities.

Another study distinguished between four types of perceived social support and explored the relations to various domains of cognition in non-demented older adults (Pillemer & Holtzer, 2016). Cognitive indicators, that is, immediate and delayed memory, attention, language and visuospatial abilities, were measured by neurocognitive paper-and-pencil tests in this study. Interestingly, only two of four types of social support were found to have significant relationships to cognitive functions: emotional/informational social support and a higher frequency of social interactions that participants perceived as positive. Emotional/informational social support is defined as nurturance and the provision of advice from others (Pillemer & Holtzer, 2016). Interestingly, the relationship between better cognitive function and higher emotional/informational support was found in women, but not in men.

Furthermore, Zahodne et al. (2014) observed the beneficial effect of emotional social support on various cognitive functions in a sample of older adults between 55 and 85 years of age. Social support received in the past month was divided into two types, emotional support and instrumental support. Emotional support denotes if individuals in subject’s social network are ready to listen to subject’s problems, while instrumental support involves material support for completing daily tasks (Zahodne et al., 2014). The state of executive functioning, working memory, processing speed and episodic memory were measured in this study. Instrumental social support showed no association with any of the measured cognitive functions. In contrast, greater emotional social support was associated with better executive functioning and processing speed. Surprisingly, episodic memory was not found to be related to social support.

The results of the above-mentioned studies indicate that emotional social support, rather than material and functional help, represents a potential supportive factor for better cognitive functioning in older adults. On the other hand, the benefit of social support in SuperAgers is questionable given some non-significant results concerning the impact of social support on episodic memory. These insights aim to inspire the designing of future empirical studies, because the relationship between social support and SuperAging remains unexplored at present.

Practical Implications

Supporting social activities in older adults is generally desirable not only because they provide cognitive stimulation, but also because of they reduce feelings of loneliness, improve mental and emotional well-being and enhance the overall quality of life for older individuals. There are a lot of different programs for stimulating social activities in late adulthood.

For example, senior centers or community centers offer activities such as group exercise classes, arts and crafts workshops or various discussion groups. These activities provide older adults with opportunities to connect with and meet new peers. These programs are very important for older adults with an insufficient number of social relationships or insufficient opportunities for social interactions in their everyday life.

Furthermore, the synthesis of empirical results presented above suggests that the quality of social relationships, rather than social network size and composition, may play a key role in the preservation of cognitive abilities in very old age. Therefore, programs supporting close, high-quality relationships seem to be quite essential. Intergenerational programs are programs that bring different generations together, such as older adults and their offspring or other relatives, for shared activities. These common activities may support improvements in already existing social relationships. In the case of disturbed social relationships with relatives, these programs also have the potential to remove some communication barriers or elicit mutual forgiving for past wrongs. These processes may be very positive for the reinstatement of past close social relations via the loss of feelings of resentment.

Currently, technology-based intervention programs are providing new opportunities for older adults. Digital tools, like video conferencing platforms, social media and online forums, enable older adults to connect with their friends and family, despite physical distance. These tools represent new opportunities for social interactions and help physically disabled older adults or older adults living far away connect with their families or close friends. Furthermore, close, high-quality social relationships may be effectively maintained or reestablished via these means. Future development of technology-based intervention programs may be inspired by the results of the present review and focused on designing tools that support long-term, close social relationships as well as a positive tone of online social contact.

Limitations

The present study has several limitations. Only papers published in English were included in the review, which could limit the richness of the results. The studies included in the review used different methods for measuring social variables, and this made comparing their results difficult. The studies also gathered data mostly on a self-reported basis. A further limitation was that some lifestyle factors could not be distinguished in the studies selection because they were not categorized as social, although they contain a social component, for example, collective activities, such as exercise, sports, games, or tourism.

Concluding Remarks

The goal of this narrative review was to suggest the main areas of interest for further research on superior cognitive aging and various aspects of social life, such as participation in social activities, quality of social relationships or social support. This effort should ideally lead to effective measures that the individuals may take to reach their full potential in cognitive health in older age, not only to do their best to prevent dementia but to become SuperAgers. Such SuperAgers may be successful anti-ageism agents in society.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Czech Science Foundation (GACR), Project No. 22-24846S “Cognitive SuperAging in Physically Active Women.”

Ethical Approval

This is a review article, therefore, this is not applicable.

ORCID iDs

Radek Trnka

Hana Georgi

Data Availability Statement

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

References

Bath

P. A.

Gardiner

(2005). Social engagement and health and social care use and medication use among older people. European Journal of Ageing, 2(1), 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-005-0022-9

Béland

Zunzunegui

M. V.

Alvarado

Otero

del Ser

(2005). Trajectories of cognitive decline and social relations. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 60(6), P320–P330. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/60.6.P320

Bennett

K. M.

(2005). Social engagement as a longitudinal predictor of objective and subjective health. European Journal of Ageing, 2(1), 48–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-005-0501-z

Borelli

W. V.

Carmona

K. C.

Studart-Neto

Nitrini

Caramelli

da Costa

J. C.

(2018). Operationalized definition of older adults with high cognitive performance. Dementia & Neuropsychologia, 12(3), 221–227. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-57642018dn12-030001

Bourassa

K. J.

Memel

Woolverton

Sbarra

D. A.

(2017). Social participation predicts cognitive functioning in aging adults over time: Comparisons with physical health, depression, and physical activity. Aging & Mental Health, 21(2), 133–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2015.1081152

Calandri

I. L.

Crivelli

Martin

M. E.

Egido

Guimet

N. M.

Allegri

R. F.

(2020). Environmental factors between normal and SuperAgers in an Argentine cohort. Dementia & Neuropsychologia, 14(4), 345–349. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-57642020dn14-040003

Cohen

Doyle

W. J.

Skoner

D. P.

Rabin

B. S.

Gwaltney

J. M.

Jr. (1997). Social ties and susceptibility to the common cold. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 277(24), 1940–1944. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1997.03540480040036

Cook Maher

Kielb

Loyer

Connelley

Rademaker

Mesulam

M. M.

Weintraub

McAdams

Logan

Rogalski

(2017). Psychological well-being in elderly adults with extraordinary episodic memory. PLoS One, 12(10), e0186413. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186413

de Frias

C. M.

Dixon

R. A.

(2014). Lifestyle engagement affects cognitive status differences and trajectories on executive functions in older adults. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 29(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/act089

10.

Dixon

R. A.

de Frias

C. M.

(2004). The Victoria longitudinal study: From characterizing cognitive aging to illustrating changes in memory compensation. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 11(2–3), 346–376. https://doi:10.1080/13825580490511161

11.

Fratiglioni

Paillard-Borg

Winblad

(2004). An active and socially integrated lifestyle in late life might protect against dementia. The Lancet Neurology, 3(6), 343–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(04)00767-7

12.

García-Chanes

R. E.

Gutiérrez-Robledo

L. M.

Álvarez-Cisneros

Roa-Rojas

(2022). Predictors of successful memory aging in older Mexican adults. Behavioural Neurology, 2022, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9045290

13.

Gefen

Shaw

Whitney

Martersteck

Stratton

Rademaker

Weintraub

Mesulam

M. M.

Rogalski

(2014). Longitudinal neuropsychological performance of cognitive SuperAgers. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 62(8), 1598–1600. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.12967

14.

Gow

A. J.

Corley

Starr

J. M.

Deary

I. J.

(2013). Which social network or support factors are associated with cognitive abilities in old age? Gerontology, 59(5), 454–463. https://doi.org/10.1159/000351265

15.

Harrison

T. M.

Weintraub

Mesulam

M. M.

Rogalski

(2012). Superior memory and higher cortical volumes in unusually successful cognitive aging. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 18(6), 1081–1085. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617712000847

16.

Heissler

Kopeček

Georgi

(2021). Leisure activities of SuperAgers. Ageing 2021: Proceedings of the 5th Gerontological Interdisciplinary Conference (pp. 77–86). Prague College of Psychosocial Studies. http://www.konferencestarnuti.cz/files/Starnuti_2021_sbornik.pdf

17.

Ihle

Oris

Sauter

Spini

Rimmele

Maurer

Kliegel

(2020). The relation of low cognitive abilities to low well-being in old age is attenuated in individuals with greater cognitive reserve and greater social capital accumulated over the life course. Aging & Mental Health, 24(3), 387–394. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2018.1531370

18.

Kats

Patel

M. D.

Palta

Meyer

M. L.

Gross

A. L.

Whitsel

E. A.

Knopman

Alonso

Mosley

T. H.

Heiss

(2016). Social support and cognition in a community-based cohort: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. Age and Ageing, 45(4), 475–480. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afw060

19.

Keating

(2022). A research framework for the United Nations Decade of Healthy Ageing (2021–2030). European Journal of Ageing, 19(3), 775–787. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-021-00679-7

20.

Kelly

M. E.

Duff

Kelly

McHugh Power

J. E.

Brennan

Lawlor

B. A.

Loughrey

D. G.

(2017). The impact of social activities, social networks, social support and social relationships on the cognitive functioning of healthy older adults: A systematic review. Systematic Reviews, 6(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0632-2

21.

Krueger

K. R.

Wilson

R. S.

Kamenetsky

J. M.

Barnes

L. L.

Bienias

J. L.

Bennett

D. A.

(2009). Social engagement and cognitive function in old age. Experimental Aging Research, 35(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610730802545028

22.

Liu

Luo

Tang

J. Y.

Wong

G. H.

(2020). Does lifestyle matter? Individual lifestyle factors and their additive effects associated with cognitive function in older men and women. Aging & Mental Health, 24(3), 405–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2018.1539833

23.

Livingston

Huntley

Sommerlad

Ames

Ballard

Banerjee

Brayne

Burns

Cohen-Mansfield

Cooper

Costafreda

S. G.

Dias

Fox

Gitlin

L. N.

Howard

Kales

H. C.

Kivimäki

Larson

E. B.

Ogunniyi

… Mukadam

(2020). Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2020 report of the Lancet Commission. The Lancet, 396(10248), 413–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30367-6

24.

Maccora

Peters

Anstey

K. J.

(2021). Gender differences in superior-memory SuperAgers and associated factors in an Australian cohort. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 40(4), 433–442. https://doi.org/10.1177/0733464820902943

25.

Miceli

Maniscalco

Matranga

(2019). Social networks and social activities promote cognitive functioning in both concurrent and prospective time: Evidence from the SHARE survey. European Journal of Ageing, 16(2), 145–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-018-0486-z

26.

Mousavi-Nasab

S. M.

Kormi-Nouri

Nilsson

L. G.

(2014). Examination of the bidirectional influences of leisure activity and memory in old people: A dissociative effect on episodic memory. British Journal of Psychology, 105(3), 382–398. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12044

27.

Philippe

F. L.

(2022). Episodic memories as proxy or independent representations: A theoretical review and an empirical test of distinct episodic memories on work outcomes. New Ideas in Psychology, 64, 100913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2021.100913

28.

Pillemer

S. C.

Holtzer

(2016). The differential relationships of dimensions of perceived social support with cognitive function among older adults. Aging & Mental Health, 20(7), 727–735. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2015.1033683

29.

Saint Martin

Sforza

Barthélémy

J. C.

Roche

Lefèvre

Liénard

Thomas-Anterion

, & PROOF Group Study. (2017). Long-lasting active lifestyle and successful cognitive aging in a healthy elderly population: The PROOF Cohort. Revue Neurologique, 173(10), 637–644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurol.2017.05.009

30.

Weber

(2016). Social engagement to prevent cognitive ageing? Age and Ageing, 45(4), 441–442. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afw083

31.

World Health Organization (WHO). (2017). Global strategy and action plan on ageing and health. World Health Organization. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/329960

32.

Yang

Chen

Yang

Chen

Zhang

(2022). Contributions of early-life cognitive reserve and late-life leisure activity to successful and pathological cognitive aging. BMC Geriatrics, 22(1), 831.

33.

Ybarra

Burnstein

Winkielman

Keller

M. C.

Manis

Chan

Rodriguez

(2008). Mental exercising through simple socializing: Social interaction promotes general cognitive functioning. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(2), 248–259. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167207310454

34.

Collinson

S. L.

Liew

T. M.

T. P.

Mahendran

Kua

E. H.

Feng

(2020). Super-cognition in aging: Cognitive profiles and associated lifestyle factors. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 27(6), 497–503. https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2019.1570928

35.

Zahodne

L. B.

(2021). Psychosocial protective factors in cognitive aging: A targeted review. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 36(7), 1266–1273. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acab051

36.

Zahodne

L. B.

Ajrouch

Sharifian

Antonucci

(2019). Social relations and age-related change in memory. Psychology and Aging, 34(6), 751–765. https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000369

37.

Zahodne

L. B.

Nowinski

C. J.

Gershon

R. C.

Manly

J. J.

(2014). Which psychosocial factors best predict cognitive performance in older adults? Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 20(5), 487–495. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617714000186

Unveiling the Social Life of SuperAgers: A Narrative Review of Social Profiles of Exceptional Cognitive Aging

Abstract

Plain Language Summary

Keywords

Introduction

Methods

Results

Social Network Size and Diversity

Social Participation in Midlife

Social Participation in Older Adulthood

Discussion

Quality of Social Relationship Versus Social Network Size and Diversity

Low Social Participation in Midlife Versus High Social Participation in Older Age

The Impact of Social Support

Practical Implications

Limitations

Concluding Remarks

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

Ethical Approval

ORCID iDs

Data Availability Statement

References