To elucidate the impact of name descriptiveness and aging on learning new names, 26 young and 26 healthy older participants learned visibly-descriptive (e.g., Lengthy for a giraffe), psychologically-descriptive (e.g., Classy), and non-descriptive (e.g., Sam) proper names for previously-unknown cartoon characters. More visibly-descriptive names were learned than psychologically- or non-descriptive names, which did not differ from each other. There was also a differential benefit for older adults when the name was visibly-descriptive of the referent, such that older adults learned visibly-descriptive names as well as young adults but there were substantial age-related deficits in learning psychologically- and non-descriptive names.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fogler et al. (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: