Adult age comparisons in the processing of event frequency information

The usual superiority in frequency-of-occurrence judgments of younger vs. older subjects was hypothesized to result from greater strategic encoding of the materials conveying frequency information. A subject-paced, visual search task was designed to control nontarget word encoding. Relative frequency judgments for the nontarget word pairs were equally accurate for younger and older subjects, and performance of both groups was above chance. Results suggest that strategic cover-task encoding can induce age differences in incidental frequency processing. Consistent with a nonoptimal as opposed to an optimal view, automatic processes require only minimal capacity for above-chance performance, but additional strategic resources can increase performance. When such additional resources are used more by younger than by older subjects, the former are better in frequency performance.     

Relations between source amnesia and frontal lobe functioning in older adults

A study is reported in which the relations among normal aging, source amnesia, and frontal lobe functioning were explored. Twenty-four older adults (aged 60-84 years) were tested on their ability to remember where they had acquired new factual information; they were also given the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST), a test of verbal fluency, and other psychometric tests. The degree of source amnesia in this normal sample correlated with age, verbal fluency, and some measures from the WCST. Source amnesia was not related to Performance IQ, however, or to a measure of fact recall. The implications for the relations among aging, memory, and frontal lobe functions are discussed.     

Effect of Client Sense of Humor and Paradoxical Interventions on Test Anxiety

This study investigated the effectiveness of paradoxical and non-paradoxical interventions with clients [henceforth known as participants] possessing a high or low sense of humor. Fifty-three test-anxious participants were divided into a low sense of humor group and a high sense of humor group and were assigned to a paradoxical intervention condition, a nonparadoxical intervention condition, or a no-treatment control group. Participants in all groups improved over time but, contrary to the hypothesis, low sense of humor participants improved significantly more with a paradoxical intervention than high sense of humor participants with a paradoxical intervention. There were no differences in improvement due to treatment condition for the high sense of humor group. Low sense of humor participants perceived the counselor as more able to help than did high sense of humor participants. The paradoxical intervention was seen as more surprising than the nonparadoxical intervention. Implications for the use of paradoxical interventions are discussed.