McCain, Obama, and Some Painful Truths About Aging
When U.S. presidential candidate John McCain had a birthday recently, television talk-show host Jay Leno told McCain that he had planned to get him a birthday cake but that the local fire chief had objected, commenting, "That many candles?"
Indeed, 72-year-old McCain is the oldest person in U.S. history to run for the presidency, and his opponent, 46-year-old Barack Obama, once accused McCain of "losing his bearings," a polite way of saying that McCain is becoming senile. McCain, in turn, sometimes refers to Obama as "that young man with very little experience."
The age issue is one of many that will help decide the upcoming election. What's the truth about it? How much difference does age actually make in competent leadership? Does cognitive ability really decline as we age, and, if so, by how much?
The American public is predictably divided on this issue. Some believe that Obama is indeed too young to assume such high office, even though John F. Kennedy was a mere 43 when he became president. Others insist that McCain is just too old, noting that President Ronald Reagan showed clear signs of Alzheimer's disease during his second term in office, when he was in his late 70s. Barely three years out of office, Reagan's cognitive impairment had become severe.
At 55, having been a research psychologist for 30 years now, I decided to take a dispassionate look at these issues. The process proved to be painful in some respects, particularly when I took an honest look at my own declining abilities. But I have long believed that knowing is better than not knowing, no matter what the pain. And when it comes to the issue of cognitive decline, knowing might also be the best defense.
Here, in brief summary form, is what relevant research says about the usual course of cognitive abilities as we age.
First, let's consider a rather basic ability: learning. Most middle-aged people are aware that their elderly parents are mystified by the latest DVD players, PDAs, and iPods -- and that the quickest way to solve a computer problem is to ask a teenager, or even a child. Do you see the trend here? Indeed, research shows unequivocally that our ability to learn new things peaks during our teen years and declines steadily thereafter. One illustrative study, conducted by Harry Braun and Richard Geiselhart a half-century ago, even showed that classical conditioning -- that most basic of learning processes first studied by Ivan Pavlov in the early 1900s with dogs -- barely occurs at all in elderly humans.
Our ability to acquire new knowledge declines in part because of a decline in most basic memory functions. The deterioration of memory is best illustrated by looking at some old research on what researchers call "incidental" memory -- remembering that occurs automatically and without effort. Mnemonic strategies mastered as we get older can mask memory's decline; when we look at what is remembered accidentally, we get a clearer picture.
Raymond Willoughby of Clark University first studied this phenomenon in 1929. He had people copy pairs of digits and symbols and then -- without first having told his subjects that he was going to do so -- later asked them to recall which symbol had been paired with each digit. Performance on this task improved from childhood to about age 13 and then declined thereafter, and old subjects performed more poorly on this task than children did. Incidental memory was also studied in a simple but ingenious study conducted by Harold E. Jones and his colleagues in which researchers asked people emerging from a cinema to give details about the film they had just seen. Teens and people in their early twenties performed best -- and elderly people could barely remember the name of the movie without looking up at the marquis. As you age, it becomes increasingly difficult to remember things unless you make a concerted effort.
The pattern is the same on classic tests of intelligence -- tests that measure basic reasoning ability, certainly an important ability for a nation's leaders. You may have heard that "IQ" remains relatively stable throughout life, and indeed it does. That's because IQ is a quotient ("Intelligence Quotient") -- a relative measure that expresses your test score in relation to test scores of people your own age. Your IQ stays roughly the same because you stay in roughly the same place with respect to your cohort.
When you look at raw scores, however -- your actual test score before it's expressed in relative terms -- the pattern is distressing. On both the traditional intelligence tests developed by David Wechsler and the more culture-free types of tests developed by J.C. Raven and others, raw scores peak between ages 13 and 15 and decline thereafter. As Wechsler put it, after age 14, increases in mental age in succeeding half-year scores "are so small as to make them unreliable," and the highest mental age we can achieve is fifteen and a half. In other words, IQ, the relative measure, is stable only because virtually everyone in your cohort is deteriorating at about the same rate.
Findings from studies of IQ are consistent with research conducted by Swiss developmental psychologist Jean Piaget and his colleagues and students. Piaget found that the highest level of reasoning, which he called "formal operational thinking," is normally achieved by age 14 or 15 -- if it is ever achieved at all.
You may also have heard that brain size is a poor predictor of intelligence. That's true when you compare species, and this also applies to genders (no one has ever figured out what human males use all that extra brain mass for). But several studies conducted over the past decade or so show that when it comes to individuals, brain size is in fact an excellent predictor of a variety of cognitive abilities. Does brain size follow the pattern we see with intelligence and memory? Indeed it does. A recent MRI study conduced by Eric Courchesne and his colleagues at the University of California San Diego shows that brain size in humans peaks at about age 14 and declines gradually thereafter. By the time a man--such as candidate McCain -- is 70, his brain has shrunk to the size it was when he was about 3. This pattern occurs both for overall brain volume and for the all-important gray matter that contains signaling neurons.
Although not central to the cognition issue, I would be remiss in failing to point out that most of our perceptual and motor capabilities also fit this disturbing pattern: our visual acuity, overall hearing ability, ability to discriminate speech sounds (important during delicate meetings of state), touch sensitivity, and so on. Elderly people sometimes, ahem, face odor challenges because--according to a study conducted in the 1980s -- they lose much of their sense of smell in their 70s and 80s. More to the point, reaction time -- our ability to respond swiftly to sudden events, which is undoubtedly an important competency for leaders -- also follows this pattern. We react to sudden stimuli most quickly in our teens and twenties and quite slowly in old age. (A new study by George Bartzokis and his colleagues at UCLA suggests that some fine motor abilities, such as finger-tapping speed, don't start declining until age 40, but this is more relevant to pianists than presidents.)
Is the news all bad? Fortunately not. Research suggests that we do become "wiser" as we get older, meaning that we can make especially good decisions in areas where we have accumulated a great deal of specialized knowledge -- as long as we don't need to acquire a great deal of new knowledge quickly, that is. In a static world, wisdom has great value, but in a rapidly changing one, it's prudent for the old to make way for the young.
As for the candidates, Obama, as brilliant as he appears to be, has likely started having trouble finding his keys, and McCain, his courage notwithstanding, is probably little more than a ghost of his former cognitive self.
This article originally appeared in the London Times on October 25, 2008.
Epstein is a visiting scholar at the University of California San Diego and the former editor-in-chief of Psychology Today magazine. His latest books are The Case Against Adolescence: Rediscovering the Adult in Every Teen and Parsing the Turing Test: Philosophical and Methodological Issues in the Quest for the Thinking Computer.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Does anyone remember Ralph Nadar? he's running and older.
No, but I remember Ralph Nader. He may be running, but very few care this time around.
Ralph who?
Yikes! I must be getting older / old... I can no longer remember the consumer advocate who I use to so admire. Now I can only see an ego-centric, self-absorbed spoiler who apparently is unable to recognize his own delusions and the consequences of his words and actions.
I agree with your assessment completely.
I used to respect Mr. Nader and his stance as consumer advocate. Now, I fear he has tossed aside his real legacy in favor of becoming a crank and egomaniac.
Dr. Epstein I think just opened up the need for Term Limits. There are members of Congress regularly serving 20, 30, 40 or more years for their country. Maybe the country doesn't need that much service from them considering the many adverse results of ineffective and inefficient government we have today.
Many say elections are term limits because their is a choice. Is a two party system real choice? Term limits may help to eliminate political cement in policies domestic and foreign. Cement is excellent in constructing buildings but is often a disaster in politics governing domestic and foreign policy.
http://uni
Interesting assessment. If we are all showing signs of mental decline in our 50's, 60's and 70's, why are we still allowing the 90+ gang to drive cars?
I wouldn't care so much about the age issue, except we are talking about a guy who was tortured and malnourished as a POW for 5 years. That's got to add 10+ years to his body.
I have to agree with stimpy, and although McCain has many character flaws - this isn't one of them. 5+ years as a POW (often tortured and in isolation) has to take a toll on one's mind and body. Severe trauma takes it's toll.
Thanks Dr. Epstein. One important function you did NOT mention which also has some effect on formal operational thinking is sexuality. 14-15 year olds may be functioning very highly operationally but unfortunately they only have about one operation in mind. It's comforting to know that the cloudiness of thought surrounding that area decreases in time USUALLY giving way to more clear thinking later in life. Of course, this is a hugely complex issue as some of our esteemed presidents have shown us. Thankfully Barack and Michelle Obama seem to have a very sincere loving relationship. The McCains? Not so much, but it really doesn't matter.
Just one correction: When Obama's campaign issued the statement that McCain had "lost his bearings", they were referring to the comments that McCain had made saying that Hamas preferred Barack Obama as President, an early attempt as a terrorist Muslim smear and a clear deviation from the respectful campaign McCain had said he wanted to run.
So he had definitely lost his bearings, which just means you've lost your sense of direction en route to your destination. And with comments like that, McCain was definitely lost in the political wilderness.
That the McCain camp successful at morphing that statement into an age attack is evident, as can be seen by the fact that the respected author of this post himself echoed their talking point.
Just this Moment, John McCain called Meg Whitman "Founder of Ebay". She Isn't and Never was. She was a Highly Paid Executive with the Title of CEO. He Doesn't get it.
There is a specific term for elders who record their memories for posterity: LifeWriters. Coincidentally, November is National Life Writing month. There are classes on the subject available for elders all over the country, and probably the world. One resource is:
http://eri
My dear departed mother took advantage of a local lifewriting course, during her 70s, and began working on her memoirs of growing up in depression-era Kentucky, becoming a young wife and mother during and post-World War 2, and our family life through the 1950s and '60s. She achieved quite an impressive body of work until her death, which may well have been delayed by her needing to "finish the stories". She left her audience (primarily my siblings and I, and our children ) wanting more, of course, but we appreciate what we have, nevertheless. A representative selection of her stories is available on her website, still maintained by our family trust: http://myw
The national age of retirement is 65 - I believe there's a reason for this.
The presidency ages people by 10 years - as witnessed by photos of current and ex presidents. If John McCane (god forbid) were elected as POTUS and even just served 4 years - he'd be 76 which would probably age him to 86....my grandmother is 93 - that's just cutting it WAY to close.
The 65 retirement age was invented in the 1950's to get rid of the past 70 generation that was holding on to jobs that needed to be freed up for younger folks.. and to purge courts of out-of-date judges.
Before that the retirement age was 75..if you lived that long.
Reagan kicked it back up to 68 - and 70 will be making a comeback -as that is where the majority of Boomers are headed
I meant losing his "principles". With an "s" at the end.
How depressing! Just not the stuff to start out the day with.
So the President should be no more than 15? I don't think so.
Not only do we need a top age requirement, we need requirements for a resume,
and minimum education/
screw that - people can write-in anyone they want.
people just need to be reminded that they get what they deserve based upon who they vote for!
speaking of which...
I want EVERYONE who makes over TWO HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS to VOTE FOR PALIN/MCCAIN - because it is better for YOUR pocketbooks. EVERYONE ELSE VOTE FOR OBAMA/BIDEN because it is better for YOUR pocketbooks. OBAMA WINS! 95-TO-5!
I believe that would be OBAMA WINS! 499 TO 1!
or somewhere there abouts.
Absolutely
These studies would indicate that we should put teenagers and 20-somethings in charge of everything - if the ability to learn "quickly" and lightening motor skills are our metric. Anybody over the age of 30 understands that would be folly. Why? Because we are, indeed, SMARTER than our children.
You mentioned wisdom - but no studies on how it has been or might be measured. Life is LIVED - and we learn more as we live it. Much of what we learn when we're young can only be UNDERSTOOD in context - and only time can give that context.
Having said that, I do believe age is a legitimate issue in the campaign - as opposed to race, which is not. As we get old, we get older faster. Stress is a MAJOR agent in the aging process and there is no more stressful job on earth than POTUS. McCain looks decidedly older since the CAMPAIGN began. Imagine what 4 years in the White House would do?
it doesn't MEAN anything. it's a set of facts.
any sensible person would see that we should take advantage of these facts by WORKING TOGETHER! nobody is SMARTER across the board than everyone else even across age gaps - try not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
your argument highlights what is so wrong with our public discourse. Firstly, I don't think that the author said what you are alleging and secondly he certainly didn't present it as an either or argument.. Experience matters, learning from experience (IMO wisdom) matters even more. There clearly is a point a which the lines ability to learn and experiences cross. Clearly that crossing point is not the same in all people -there are older people I know who have a much greater ability to learn than people younger than them.
The question then boils down to what have the candidates done or said that would lead us to believe that they are not at the average of the age cohort. In this respect McCain's lack of familiarity with computers is very telling. In 1984 John McCain was 48 years old and his understanding then and now was less than that of my father in 1984 at a time that my father was 63 years old.
For me, it's not McCain's cognitive ability that is so much of a problem, it's his temper. I remember how much Ronald Reagan loved Nancy, and doubt very much McCain would quietly let Cindy do this for him. Maybe Lieberman, but not Cindy. Also, far more important, consider McCain's gambling addiction. You didn't know? Well, apparently his favorite game is craps, and he will bet his entire pot on a roll of the dice. Cindy has had to bail him out several times. Check out this NY Times article:
http://www
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
