The Seattle Longitudinal Study:
Past, Present and Future
K. Warner Schaie, Ph.D.
Sherry L. Willis, Ph.D.
University of Washington
Acknowledgements
Funded in part by Grant R13AG030995-01A1
from the National Institute on Aging
The views expressed in written conference
materials or publications and by speakers and
moderators do not necessarily reflect the official
policies of the Department of Health and Human
Services; nor does mention by trade names,
commercial practices, or organizations imply
endorsement by the U.S. Government.
Work on the Seattle Longitudinal Study, data
from which are reported here, has been
supported by grants from:
The National Institute of Child Health and Human
Development (HD00367, 1963-1965; HD04476,
1970-1973) and the National Institute of Aging
(AG00480, 1973-1979; AG03544, 1982-1986;
(AG04470, 1984-1989; AG08055, 1980-2006;
currently AG024102, 2005-2015 and AG027759,
2006-2008).
Scientific Collaborators
Elizabeth Aylward
Paul Baltes
Ute Bayen
Hayden Bothworth
Julie Boron
Barbara Buech
Heather Chipuer
Theresa Cooney
Ranjana Dutta
Dennis Gerstorf
Judith Gonda
Kathy Gribbin
Christopher Hertzog Robert Intrieri
Alfred Kaszniak
Iseli Krauss
Karen Lala
Thomas Ledermann
Heiner Maier
Scott Maitland
John Nesselroade
Ha Nguyen
Iris Parham
Robert Plomin
Margaret Quayhagen Andrew Revell
Amy Roth
Lindsay Ryan
Vicki Stone
Charles Strother
Nicholas Turiano
Gisela Vief
Elizabeth Zelinski
Thomas Barrett
Paul Borghesani
Grace Caskie
Cindy de Frias
Michael Gilewski
Ann Gruber-Baldini
Gina Jay
Eric Labouvie
Tara Madhyastha
Ann Nardi
Ann O’Hanlon
Samuel Popkin
Anne Richards
John Schulenberg
Linda Teri
Faika Zanjan
The Seattle Longitudinal Study
(SLS) Major Topics
Age Changes and Age Differences
Antecedents of Individual Differences
in Aging
Cohort & Generational Differences
Interventions to Slow Cognitive Aging
Family Studies
Midlife Precursors of Cognitive Decline
or Maintenance in Old Age
Conceptual Model of the SLS
Design of the Seattle Longitudinal Study
1956 1963
S1T1
S1T2
Study Waves
1970 1977 1984
S1T3
S1T4
S1T5
1991
1998
2005
S1T6
S1T7
S1T8
(N = 38)
(N = 26)
S2T7
S2T8
(N = 500) (N = 303) (N = 162) (N = 130) (N = 92) (N = 71)
S2T2
S2T3
(N = 997) (N = 420)
S3T3
S2T4
S2T5
S2T6
(N = 337) (N = 204) (N = 161) (N = 104) (N = 74)
S3T4
S3T5
S3T6
S3T7
S3T8
S4T4
S4T5
S4T6
S4T7
S4T8
(N = 705) (N = 340) (N = 225) (N = 175) (N = 127) (N = 93)
(N = 612) (N = 294) (N = 201) (N = 136) (N = 119)
S5T5
S5T6
S5T7
S5T8
(N = 628) (N = 428) (N = 266) (N = 186)
S6T6
S6T7
S6T8
(N = 693) (N = 406) (N = 288)
S = Sample; T = Time of Measurement
S7T7
S7T8
(N = 719) (N = 421)
Cognitive
Personlaity
5 PMA:
Voc
Reason,
Number
Space
Fluency
TBR
6 Factors:
Verbal
Space
Number
Reason
Memory
Speed
NEO
Everyday
Problems
13 PF
Neuropsych
Lifestyle
Health
Biomarkers
8 Activity
Domains
ICD-A
APO-E
Self Report
Lipids
Homocystene
C-Reactive
Pharmacy
Neuroimaging
Work
Enviornment
(Moos,
Schooler)
Family
Environment
Demographics
ABILITIES
Verbal Comprehension
Spatial Orientation
Inductive Reasoning
Numeric Facility
Perceptual Speed
Verbal Memory
Examples of Ability Test Items
Verbal
Verbal Meaning
Meaning
OLD
OLD
a.
a. Good
Good b.
b. Ancient
Ancient
d.
d. Respected
Respected
c.
c. Wise
Wise
Space
Space
F
F
F
F
F
F
Reasoning
Reasoning
aa bb w
w cc dd xx ee ff
Number
Number
bb yy dd gg
a.
a.
b.
b.
46
46
15
15
27
27
88
88
28
28
39
39
12
12
78
78
a.
a.
b.
b.
R
R
R
R
W
W
W
W
TBR Measures: Examples
A. Psychomotor Speed:
Composite of Two Measures:
1. Copying Paragraph
“The DUKE carried a Sword.”
2. Giving Antonyms or Synonyms
a. White - Black
b. White - Pale
B. Motor Cognitive Flexibility (Set Shifting):
Composite of Measures
1. Ratio: Speed of Copying/Speed of Set Shifting
(“The DUKE carried a Sword.”/”tHE duke CARRIED A sWORD”
2. Ratio: Antonyms or Synonyms
Antonyms: WHITE - Black
Synonyms: white - pale
C. Attitudinal Flexibility:
Questionnaire (T/F)
“It bothers me if people can’t make up their mind.”
“I would go into a theatre without buying a ticket.”
Cross-Sectional Age Differences
Longitudinal Age Changes
Longitudinal Changes:
Cognitive Styles (TBR Factors)
Separating Cohort Differences
from AGE Changes
Example of a
Cohort-Sequential Data Set
from the SLS
Age
Age
Birth
Birth
Cohort
Cohort
39
39
46
46
53
53
60
60
67
67
1917
1917 1956
1956
1963
1963
1970
1970
1977
1977
1984
1984
1924
1924 1963
1963
1970
1970
1977
1977
1984
1984
1991
1991
Studying Cohort/Generational
Differences:
Cohort Studies
Family Studies
Cohort Studies
Cohort Effects in Cognitive Styles (TBR)
The Family (Generational) Study
Family Similarity in Intellectual
Competence
Family Similarity in Cognitive Style
Similarity in Perception of Family
Environment
Generational Difference in Abilities
62
Number
60
Reasoning
Space
58
Verbal Meaning
Word Fluency
56
54
52
50
48
Occasion:
Generation
1970
1977
Parents
1984
1989
1996
2003
Adult Offspring
New Family Studies
Third Generation Study
Studies of Rate of Change
Rate of Cognitive Change
Inductive Reasoning
65
60
Mean T-Scores
55
50
45
40
35
1889
1896
1903
1910
1917
1924
1931
1938
1945
1952
1959
1966
30
25
32
39
46
53
60
Age
67
74
81
88
Rate of Cognitive Change
Verbal Ability
60
55
Mean T-Scores
50
45
40
35
30
1889
1896
1903
1910
1917
1924
1931
1938
1945
1952
1959
1966
25
25
32
39
46
53
60
Age
67
74
81
88
Cohort Differences in Cognitive Aging: Higher Levels
Shallower Rates of Decline among Later-Born Cohorts
Fluid Abilities:
Inductive Reasoning
Crystallized Abilities:
Verbal Meaning
0.60 SD *
60
70
80
0.57 SD *
50
50
60
70
80
Later-born cohorts (1914–1948)
Earlier-born cohorts (1883–1913)
Note. Models covaried for gender, education, and
presence of circulatory diseases.
Note. * p < .01
Gerstorf et al., 2009
Impact of Demographic
Characteristics
Education
Occupation
Verbal Ability and Education
Verbal Ability and Occupation
Cognitive Interventions to Slow Aging
Remediation or New Learning
Need for Longitudinal Data
Targets of Intervention
Transfer of Training
Maintenance of Effects
Design of Training Study
Design
of Seattle
Training
Study within
within
Longitudinal
Study SLS
1984
Wave
1970
1984
1977
1991
1991
1998
1991
Wave
1998
1998
Wave
1984
PreTrain
14 Yr
1998
Booster 1
Booster 2
Pre Post
Pre Post
Occasion
Pre Post
Training
Results of Cognitive Training
Results Ability:
of Cognitive
Training
Reasoning
3 Training
Waves
7
6
5
4
Space Train
Reason Train
3
2
1
0
1984 Wave
1991 Wave
1998 Wave
Maintenance of Cognitive
Training Over 14 Years
Early Detection of Risk of Dementia
Neuropsychology Studies in
Community Dwelling Persons
Genetic Studies: The ApoE Gene
Cognitive Training as Early
Predictor of Impairment
Population Screened
Community Dwelling Adults Aged 60 +
Total Screened = 499
Neuropsychologists’ Consensus
Probably impaired:
Borderline:
Should be monitored:
Normal:
12 (2.4%)
22 (4.4%)
111 (22.%)
354 (70.9%)
Training
and
Cognitive
Training and Cognitive Impairment: 28 Year Data
Impairment: 28-Year Data
Reas Normal
Reas Monitor
Reas Cog Im
56
54
PMA Reasoning
52
50
48
46
44
42
40
38
36
1970
Pretrain
1984
Pretest
1984
Posttest
1991 Boost 1991Boost 1998Boost 1998Boost2
1 Pretest 1 Post 2 Pretest
Post
T ime of Measurement
Correlating Autopsy Findings
with Cognitive Change
Current and Future Work with
the Seattle Longitudinal Study
Midlife Cognitive Change and Risk
of Cognitive Decline
Key Questions:
Is cognitive status and change in midlife
predictive of
Subsequent cognitive risk
Successful aging
Is midlife cognitive change related to brain
volume and rate of change in brain volume?
What behavioral and health factors are related to
cognitive change in midlife and old age?
Background:
Stability of cognitive functioning is normative in
midlife
Longitudinal studies indicate subgroups with cognitive
decline or gain
Prospective dementia studies indicate lengthy
preclinical phase beginning in late midlife
Multi-ability involvement in preclinical phase
Cognitive reserve appears to develop early and
may reduce risk of cognitive impairment
Limited study of brain-behavior associations in
midlife
SLS Sample:
Older Cohort (b1914 - 1941)
Ability data available in midlife and old age
N = 332
Middle Age Cohort (b1942 - 1962)
Ability data available in midlife
N = 321
Development of Midlife Cognitive Risk Profile:
3 Abilities associated with Cognitive Impairment
Episodic Memory
Reliable decline, stable, or gain in midlife
Executive Functioning
Reliable decline, stable, or gain in midlife
Psychomotor Speed
Reliable decline, stable, or gain in midlife
Delayed Recall t-score
60
55
50
45
Decline--ScanOA
40
35
Gain--ScanOA
Decline--ScanMA
Gain--ScanMA
46
53
60
AGE
67
74
Specificity of Midlife Change Patterns: Longitudinal Data
Midlife Decline on Episodic Memory
DLREC
EX
VOC
NUM
SPATIAL
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
46
53
60
67
74
AGE
Midlife Gain on Episodic Memory
DLREC
EX
VOC
NUM
SPATIAL
REASON
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
46
53
60
AGE
67
74
Long term Outcomes of Midlife Cognitive Change:
Hippocampal Volume in Old Age
Delayed Recall t-sco re
60
Scan MA
Scan OA
55
50
45
Decline--ScanOA
40
Gain--ScanOA
Decline--ScanMA
Gain--ScanMA
7
35
46
6
53
60
67
74
AGE
5
4
Midlife Decline
3
Midlife Gain
Midlife Decline
2
Midlife Gain
1
0
Scan OA
Scan MA
Adjusted means: ICV, Memory score age 60
Gainer - Old Age
Decliner - Old Age
Borghesani et al. 2010
Midlife Predictors:
Level and Rate of Change in Memory & Executive Functions
(Predictors Common to Memory and Executive versus Unique to One Ability)
EXAGE46
MCR
.37**
-.14
COMORBIDITY
.21*
Ex Int
EXAGE60
Ex Lin
EXAGE67
-.09*
APOE4
-.24*
EXAGE53
Ex Quad
EXAGE74
.06*
Int ACTIVITIES
.37**
TDLAGE53
DR Int
.22**
GENDER
YR EDUC
.33**
TDLAGE60
.28*
TDLAGE67
DR Lin
TDLAGE74
Willis et al., 2010
Engagement in Midlife:
Intellectual Activities
Work Environment in Midlife:
Routinization in Work Activities
Societal Implications
Normative Decline of Cognitive Abilities Does
not Occur until the mid-60s
Decline Does not Become Substantial until the
late 70s or early 80s
Successive Generations Attain Higher Levels of
Function and Show Later Decline
Normative Decline can be Slowed by Cognitive
Training
High Level of Educational and Occupational
Status and Stimulating Environments Support
Maintenance of Cognitive Function in Old Age
Implications for Clinical Practice
Cognitive Decline Prior to Age 60 May be
an Indicator of Neuro- or Psychopathology
Midlife Cognitive Decline May be a
Predictor of High Risk of Dementia in Old
Age
Cognitive Training May be a Useful
Intervention for Delaying Onset of
Clinically Diagnosable Dementia
Reference:
Schaie, K. W. (2005). Developmental
influences on adult intelligence: The Seattle
Longitudinal Study. New York: Oxford
University Press
Web site URL:
http://www.uwpsychiatry.org/sls