|LETTERS TO EDITOR
|Year : 2017 | Volume
| Issue : 1 | Page : 69-70
Memory, verbal fluency, and response inhibition in normal aging
Gaurav Thapliyal1, Susmita Halder2, Akash Mahato3
1 Amity Institute of Behavioural and Allied Sciences, Amity University, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
2 Depaerment of Clinical Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
3 Department of Clinical Psychology, Institute of Mental Health, Sweekaar Academy of Rehabilitation Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
|Date of Web Publication||20-Jun-2017|
Department of Clinical Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, 7 DL Khan Road, Kolkata - 700 025, West Bengal
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
|How to cite this article:|
Thapliyal G, Halder S, Mahato A. Memory, verbal fluency, and response inhibition in normal aging. J Geriatr Ment Health 2017;4:69-70
|How to cite this URL:|
Thapliyal G, Halder S, Mahato A. Memory, verbal fluency, and response inhibition in normal aging. J Geriatr Ment Health [serial online] 2017 [cited 2023 Jun 4];4:69-70. Available from: https://www.jgmh.org/text.asp?2017/4/1/69/208612
We appreciate the efforts of the fellow reader on highlighting certain valid issues in our article  on memory, verbal fluency, and response inhibition in normal aging. The primary aim of the research was to assess memory functions, verbal fluency, and response inhibition in normal aging, and Mini–Mental Status Examination (MMSE) was used to rule out cognitive impairment in the sample.
We agree on the contention raised by the reader upon the generic use of the terms “dysfunction/impairment” in the article and also agree on the need of being more judicious in using the terms, especially in the conclusion section of the article. However, use of the terms was to denote the deterioration in the functions as a reflection of poor test scores on the PGI memory scale, which was secondary to age only. The authors attempted to explore the relatively lesser studied population for the stated aims, despite not having normative data for older adults in India. The nearest Indian age norms available were that of NIMHANS Battery that has norms till 65 years. Otherwise too, in the present study, the mean age of the sample is 63.6 years (standard deviation 1.13).
While the sensitivity aspect of MMSE to screen minimal cognitive impairment is an issue, a higher cutoff for the sample on MMSE (e.g., 27 instead of 24) could have given a better representation of the intended population. Limitation in terms of availability of tools was an issue for choosing MMSE as a screening tool.
We thank the reader for the valuable inputs.
Financial support and sponsorship
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| References|| |
Thapliyal G, Halder S, Mahato A. Memory, verbal fluency, and response inhibition in normal aging. J Geriatr Ment Health 2016;3:145-9. [Full text]