{"database":"biostudies-literature","file_versions":[],"scores":null,"additional":{"submitter":["Divers R"],"funding":["NIA NIH HHS","Temple University","National Institute on Aging"],"pagination":["308-326"],"full_dataset_link":["https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC7606330"],"repository":["biostudies-literature"],"omics_type":["Unknown"],"volume":["28(2)"],"pubmed_abstract":["Mild functional difficulties associated with cognitive aging may be reliably measured by coding \"micro-errors\" during everyday tasks, like meal preparation. Micro-errors made by 25 older adult and 48 younger adults were coded on four dimensions to evaluate the influence of: 1) poor error monitoring; 2) goal decay; 3) competition for response selection when switching to a new subtask; and 4) interference from distractor objects. Micro-errors made by young adults under a dual task load also were analyzed to determine the influence of overall performance level. Older adults' micro-errors were observed when switching to a new subtask and to unrelated distractors. Slowed error monitoring and goal decay also influenced micro-errors in older adults, but not significantly more so than younger adul"],"journal":["Neuropsychology, development, and cognition. Section B, Aging, neuropsychology and cognition"],"pubmed_title":["When and how did you go wrong? Characterizing mild functional difficulties in older adults during an everyday task."],"pmcid":["PMC7606330"],"funding_grant_id":["R21AG060422","F31 AG069444","R21 AG060422","R21 AG066771","Diamond Research Scholars Program","R01 AG062503"],"pubmed_authors":["Ham L","Giovannetti T","Mis R","Divers R","Hackett K","Matchanova A","Howard K","Rycroft SS","Roll E"],"additional_accession":[]},"is_claimable":false,"name":"When and how did you go wrong? Characterizing mild functional difficulties in older adults during an everyday task.","description":"Mild functional difficulties associated with cognitive aging may be reliably measured by coding \"micro-errors\" during everyday tasks, like meal preparation. Micro-errors made by 25 older adult and 48 younger adults were coded on four dimensions to evaluate the influence of: 1) poor error monitoring; 2) goal decay; 3) competition for response selection when switching to a new subtask; and 4) interference from distractor objects. Micro-errors made by young adults under a dual task load also were analyzed to determine the influence of overall performance level. Older adults' micro-errors were observed when switching to a new subtask and to unrelated distractors. Slowed error monitoring and goal decay also influenced micro-errors in older adults, but not significantly more so than younger adul","dates":{"release":"2021-01-01T00:00:00Z","publication":"2021 Mar","modification":"2025-04-03T23:32:23.699Z","creation":"2025-02-18T23:53:03.553Z"},"accession":"S-EPMC7606330","cross_references":{"pubmed":["32352347"],"doi":["10.1080/13825585.2020.1756210"]}}