IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/geronb/v72y2017i6p991-995..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Personal Journal Keeping and Linguistic Complexity Predict Late-Life Dementia Risk: The Cache County Journal Pilot Study

Author

Listed:
  • Jessica J Weyerman
  • Cassidy Rose
  • Maria C Norton

Abstract

Objectives: We determined the feasibility of accessing personal journals and correlating markers of linguistic complexity with all-cause dementia and Alzheimer’s disease (AD).Method: A stratified random sample of 215 older adults reported on lifetime journal writing habits. From 66 of these participants (49% of those with journals), digital photographs of journal text were transcribed then subjected to the Linguistic Inquiry Word Count program to measure linguistic complexity markers: Words per Sentence, Percentage of 6+ Letter Words, Cognitive Mechanics, Percentage of Unique Words, and Percentage of Words that are Numerals. AD diagnosis was made via in-depth clinical protocol. Results: In the larger sample, ever being a journal writer significantly predicted a 53% reduction in all-cause dementia risk. In the subsample with transcribed writings, Percentage of 6+ Letter Words predicted AD and all-cause dementia risk, with all logistic regression models controlling for age, education, gender, and Latter-Day Saints affiliation. Discussion: These data suggest the potential viability of adulthood language use as a predictive tool for late-life AD risk, both in the linguistic features and the practice of journal writing itself.

Suggested Citation

  • Jessica J Weyerman & Cassidy Rose & Maria C Norton, 2017. "Personal Journal Keeping and Linguistic Complexity Predict Late-Life Dementia Risk: The Cache County Journal Pilot Study," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 72(6), pages 991-995.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:72:y:2017:i:6:p:991-995.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/geronb/gbw076
    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:991-995.. 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.