Planning ability is important in many everyday tasks, such as cooking and shopping. Previous studies have investigated aging effects on planning, looking at either widely used laboratory-based neuropsychological tasks such as the Tower of London (TOL) or more naturalistic planning tasks, such as organizing shopping errands. In the current study, we compare the effects of normal adult aging on both the TOL and a more ecologically valid planning task, the Plan-a-Day (PAD) task. There was a reliable decline in TOL planning performance with age, but no significant correlation between age and PAD planning performance. Age-related variance was partly explained by variance in information processing speed and education. It is proposed that in more ecologically valid planning tasks, age changes in processing speed can be compensated for by task-related knowledge. Implications for everyday planning performance by older adults are considered.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndresA. U.van der LindenM. (2000). Age-related differences in supervisory attentional functions. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 55, 373–380.
2.
Cahn-WeinerD.A.MalloyP.F.BoyleP.A.MarranM.SallowayS. (2000). Prediction of functional status from neuropsychological tests in community-dwelling elderly individuals. Clinical Neuropsychologist, 14, 187–195.
3.
CrawfordJ. R.BryanJ.LuszczM. A.ObonsawinM. C.StewartL. (2000). The executive decline hypothesis of cognitive aging: Do executive deficits qualify as differential deficits and do they mediate age-related memory decline?Aging Neuropsychology and Cognition, 7, 9–31.
4.
CzajaS. J.SharitJ. (2003). Practically relevant research: Capturing real world tasks, environments and outcomes. The Gerontologist, 43, Special Issue 1, 9–18.
5.
FunkeJ.KrugerT. (1993). “Plan-A-Day” (PAD). Bonn: Psychologisches Institut der Universität Bonn.
6.
FunkeJ.KrugerT. (1995). “Plan-A-Day”: Konzeption ernes modifizierbaren Instruments zur Führungskräfte-Auswahl sowie erste empirische Befunde [Concept and first empirical results of a modified management assessment test]. In FunkeJ.FritzA. (Eds.), Neue Konzepte und Instrumente zur Planungsdiagnostik [New concepts and instruments for the assessment of planning abilities] (pp. 97–120). Bonn: Deutscher Psychologen Verlag.
7.
GardenS.PhillipsL. H.MacPhersonS. E. (2001). Mid-life aging, open-ended planning and laboratory measures of executive function. Neuropsychology, 15, 472–482.
8.
GilhoolyK. J.PhillipsL. H.WynnV. E.LogieR. H.Della SalaS. (1999). Planning processes and age in the 5 disc Tower of London task. Thinking and Reasoning, 5, 339–361.
9.
Gouzoulis-MayfrankE.ThimmB.RezkM.HensenG.DaumannJ. (2002). Memory impairment suggests hippocampal dysfunction in absintent ecstasy users. Progress in Neuropsychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry, 27, 819–827.
10.
HasherL.StolzfusE. R.ZacksR. T.RypmaB. (1991). Age and inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 17, 163–169.
11.
Hayes-RothB.Hayes-RothF. (1979). A cognitive model of planning. Cognitive Science, 3, 275–310.
12.
HenryJ. D.MacLeodM.PhillipsL. H.CrawfordJ. R. (2004). A meta-analytic review of age effects on prospective memory. Psychology and Aging, 19, 27–39.
13.
HouxP. J.JollesJ.VreelingF. W. (1993). Stroop interference: Aging effects assessed with the Stroop color-word test. Experimental Aging Research, 19, 209–224.
14.
KliegelM.MartinM.McDanielM. A.PhillipsL. H. (in prep.). Older adults' planning: Experience can compensate for cognitive decline. Manuscript in preparation.
15.
KliegelM.McDanielM. A.EinsteinG. O. (2000). Plan formation, retention, and execution in prospective memory: A new paradigm and age-related effects. Memory and Cognition, 28, 1041–1049.
16.
KohlerJ. A.PoserU.SchönleP. W. (1995). The application of “plan-a-day” in neuropsychological assessment and therapy. In FunkeJ.FritzA. (Eds.), Neue Konzepte und Instrumente zur Planungsdiagnostik (pp. 167–181). Bonn: Deutscher Psychologen Verlag.
17.
LachmanM. E.BurackO. R. (1983). Planning and control processes across the lifespan: An overview. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 16, 131–143.
18.
MarsiskeM.LangF. R.BaltesP. B.BaltesM. M. (1995). Selective optimization with compensation: Life-span perspectives on successful human development. In DixonR. A.BäckmanL. (Eds.), Compensating for psychological deficits and declines: Managing losses and promoting gains (pp. 35–79). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
19.
MartinM.EwertO. (1997). Attention and planning in older adults. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 20, 577–594.
20.
PhillipsL. H.GilhoolyK. J.LogieR. H.Della SalaS.WynnV. (2003). Age, working memory, and the Tower of London task. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 15, 291–312.
21.
PhillipsL. H.MacLeodM.KliegelM. (2005). Adult aging and cognitive planning. In WardG.MorrisR. (Eds.), The cognitive psychology of planning (pp. 111–139). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
22.
PhillipsL. H.WynnV. E.McPhersonS.GilhoolyK. J. (2001). Mental planning and the Tower of London task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 54, 579–598.
23.
SalthouseT. A. (1996). The processing-speed theory of adult age differences in cognition. Psychological Review, 103, 403–428.
24.
ShalliceT. (1982). Specific impairments of planning. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 298, 199–209.
