Age Differences in Motivated Cognition: A Meta-Analysis

12Citations
Citations of this article
25Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objectives: The goal of this preregistered study was to synthesize empirical findings on age differences in motivated cognition using a meta-analytic approach, with a focus on the domains of cognitive control and episodic memory. Methods: A systematic search of articles published before July 2022 yielded 27 studies of cognitive control (N = 1,908) and 73 studies of memory (N = 5,837). Studies had to include healthy younger and older adults, a within-subjects or between-subjects comparison of motivation (high vs low), and a measure of cognitive control or memory. The Age × Motivation effect size was meta-analyzed using random-effects models, and moderators were examined using meta-regressions and subgroup analyses. Results: Overall, the Age × Motivation interaction was not significant in either cognitive domain, but the effect sizes in both domains were significantly heterogeneous, indicating a possible role of moderating factors in accounting for effect size differences. Moderator analyses revealed significant moderation by incentive type for episodic memory, but not for cognitive control. Older adults' memory was more sensitive to socioemotional rewards, whereas younger adults' memory was more sensitive to financial gains. Discussion: Findings are discussed with reference to the dopamine hypothesis of cognitive aging and to life-span theories of motivational orientation. None of these theories is fully supported by the meta-analysis findings, highlighting the need for an integration of neurobiological, cognitive process, and life-span-motivational perspectives.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Swirsky, L. T., Sparrow, E. P., Sullivan, M. D., Valenzano, S. L., Chowdhury, S., & Spaniol, J. (2023). Age Differences in Motivated Cognition: A Meta-Analysis. Journals of Gerontology - Series B Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 78(7), 1169–1181. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbad049

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free