IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/geronb/v72y2017i6p932-936..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Negative Aging Stereotypes Impair Performance on Brief Cognitive Tests Used to Screen for Predementia

Author

Listed:
  • Marie Mazerolle
  • Isabelle Régner
  • Sarah J Barber
  • Marc Paccalin
  • Aimé-Chris Miazola
  • Pascal Huguet
  • François Rigalleau

Abstract

Objectives: There is today ample evidence that negative aging stereotypes impair healthy older adults’ performance on cognitive tasks. Here, we tested whether these stereotypes also decrease performance during the screening for predementia on short cognitive tests widely used in primary care. Method: An experiment was conducted on 80 healthy older adults taking the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) under Threat or Reduced-threat condition. Results: Stereotype threat significantly impaired older adults’ performance on both tests, resulting in 40% of older adults meeting the screening criteria for predementia, compared with 10% in Reduced-threat condition (MMSE and MoCA averaged).Discussion: Our research highlights the influence of aging stereotypes on short cognitive tests used to screen for predementia. It is of critical importance that physicians provide a threat-free testing environment. Further research should clarify whether this socially induced bias may also operate in secondary care by generating false positives.

Suggested Citation

  • Marie Mazerolle & Isabelle Régner & Sarah J Barber & Marc Paccalin & Aimé-Chris Miazola & Pascal Huguet & François Rigalleau, 2017. "Negative Aging Stereotypes Impair Performance on Brief Cognitive Tests Used to Screen for Predementia," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 72(6), pages 932-936.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:72:y:2017:i:6:p:932-936.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/geronb/gbw083
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:72:y:2017:i:6:p:932-936.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.