| Literature DB >> 33266459 |
Maria Chiara Fastame1, Silvia Melis1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The capacity of understanding and manipulating numerical stimuli (i.e., numeracy) can impact decision making. This investigation was conducted to examine whether number comprehension and mental calculation predict hedonic (i.e., Scale of Positive and Negative Experience, SPANE) and eudaimonic (i.e., Flourishing Scale) well-being in late adulthood, and whether cognitive reserve (i.e., education, time spent for gardening, and time spent for leisure activities) and non-verbal reasoning predict numeracy skills of old adults. Additionally, the effect of age on numeracy was examined, controlling for the effect of education and cognitive efficiency.Entities:
Keywords: aging; cognitive reserve; mental calculation; mental health; metacognition; number comprehension; numeracy; physical health; psychological well-being
Year: 2020 PMID: 33266459 PMCID: PMC7700381 DOI: 10.3390/bs10110176
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Behav Sci (Basel) ISSN: 2076-328X
Socio-demographic information and global cognitive efficiency (i.e., Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE)) scores collected from all the participants in the study.
| Variable | Young-Old | Very-Old |
| t | df |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | Group | |||||
| n | 73 | 85 | 0.911 | 1 | 0.34 | |
| Gender | 0.13 | 1 | 0.72 | |||
| males | 28 | 35 | ||||
| females | 45 | 50 | ||||
| Age (years) | M = 70.7 | M = 80.1 | ||||
| (SD = 2.5) | (SD = 4.3) | |||||
| Age range (years) | 65–74 | >74 | ||||
| Education (years) | M = 9.5 | M = 6.3 | 5.1 | 156 | <0.001 | |
| (SD = 4.2) | (SD = 3.5) | |||||
| Educational attainment | 10.72 | 1 | 0.001 | |||
| low | 44 | 71 | ||||
| high | 29 | 14 | ||||
| Marital status | 11.27 | 1 | 0.001 | |||
| Single/widow | 21 | 47 | ||||
| Married | 52 | 38 | ||||
| Living | 10.56 | 1 | 0.001 | |||
| alone | 12 | 34 | ||||
| with others | 61 | 51 | ||||
| Time spent on hobbies | M = 29.9 | M = 22.3 | 2.77 | 156 | 0.006 | |
| (hours per week) | (SD = 18.4) | (SD = 16.4) | ||||
| MMSE score | M = 26.6 | M = 26.09 | 1.77 | 156 | 0.08 | |
| (SD = 1.3) | (SD = 2.4) | |||||
| Signs of Cognitive Decline | 10.42 | 1 | 0.001 | |||
| No | 72 | 71 | ||||
| Yes | 1 | 14 |
Person’s correlations among numeracy (i.e., Mental Calculation, Number Comprehension), time spent for leisure activities (i.e., Time), years of education (i.e., Education), global cognitive efficiency (i.e., MMSE), perceived physical health (i.e., Perceived Physical Health index (PHYS)), metacognitive efficiency (i.e., Cognitive Failure Questionnaire (CFQ)), hedonic (i.e., Scale of Positive and Negative Experience (SPANE)) and eudaimonic (i.e., Flourishing) well-being, and non-verbal reasoning (i.e., Raven’s Colored Progressive Matrices (CPM)), respectively.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| — | ||||||||||
|
| 0.432 *** | — | |||||||||
|
| 0.117 | 0.116 | — | ||||||||
|
| 0.437 *** | 0.308 *** | 0.031 | ||||||||
|
| 0.096 | 0.152 | 0.151 | 0.211 * | — | ||||||
|
| 0.029 | −0.059 | 0.161 * | 0.014 | −0.031 | — | |||||
|
| 0.068 | 0.138 | −0.138 | 0.04 | 0.019 | -0.237 ** | — | ||||
|
| 0.014 | 0.161 * | 0.283 ** | −0.003 | −0.034 | 0.276 *** | −0.365 *** | — | |||
|
| −0.061 | −0.008 | 0.269 ** | −0.162 * | −0.177 * | 0.234 ** | −0.269 *** | 0.48 *** | — | ||
|
| 0.43 *** | 0.397 *** | 0.08 | 0.775 *** | 0.422 ** | −0.031 | 0.019 | −0.034 | −0.177 * | — | |
|
| 0.553 *** | 0.432 *** | 0.19 * | 0.484 *** | 0.333 ** | −0.06 | 0.184 * | 0.106 | −0.5 | 0.53 *** | — |
Note. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Figure 1The predicted mediational pattern for Mental Calculation using CPM as the independent variable and educational attainment as mediator.
Figure 2The predicted mediational pattern for Mental Calculation using CPM as the independent variable and vocabulary knowledge as mediator.
Figure 3The predicted mediational patterns for Mental Calculation using vocabulary knowledge as the independent variable and educational attainment as mediator.