Elderly Who Forget Age Remember Better

A study in the journal Experimental Aging Research finds that senior citizens who were reminded about their age and stereotypes about old age performed worse on memory tests than secure seniors. Cynthia Graber reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


[The following is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

Senior citizens, don’t believe the hype. Because a new study finds that older folks who accept that seniors’ memories get worse do worse on memory tests. The finding was published in the journal Experimental Aging Research.

Scientists interested in the effects of stereotype on memory enlisted 103 seniors between 60- and 82-years-old to take a memory test. Before the test, some subjects were told that the test checked the effects of age on memory. Researchers call this a threat—it reminds participants of the stereotype. That group was also asked to write down their age after reading the instructions, again homing in on the stereotype.

The other group was told that the test controlled for biases. This could make them feel more secure. Researchers also gave participants a stigma consciousness questionnaire to test how strongly they bought into negative stereotypes.

The results: participants who got reminded of their age and the old age, poor memory stereotype did significantly worse. Those who say they feel stigmatized also performed more poorly. So your memory may function better just by believing that it will. In which case, you really will eventually figure out where you left your car keys.

—Cynthia Graber

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe