Figure 4. Age-related declines in ProM with focal vs. non-focal cues, disregarding ceiling effects, confounds, and subdomains.

These figures include the best fitting estimated d derived by double variate square error minimization methods and associated 95% confidence intervals derived by bootstrapping methods. This figure highlights that the vast majority of studies in both focal and non-focal conditions show substantial age-related declines and that age-related declines with focal cues were comparable to age-related declines with non-focal cues. However, these results reflect a specific blend of ceiling-limited and age-confounded studies of ProM proper, vigilance/monitoring, and habitual ProM all mixed together despite known differences among them.