How do you account for criticisms of IQ? I think anecdotes are permissible here since we are looking for counter-examples: I know people who have scored in the 110s and 120s on IQ tests in school, who are now, in their 30s, very prolific researchers. On the contrary, I also know a few people who scored very high in school IQ tests (140+) who haven't amounted to much, professionally, later in life.
Other counter-examples to the general trend of 'age-related mental deterioration' include several greats in creative fields (e.g. P̶a̶b̶l̶o̶ ̶P̶i̶c̶a̶s̶s̶o̶,̶ ̶T̶.̶ ̶S̶ ̶E̶l̶i̶o̶t̶ Paul Cezanne, Robert Frost, etc.) [1] whose best work came later in life. All said and done, it is hard to quantify success and definitively relate quantifiable functions of the brain with 'success' and 'creativity'. An extreme example in the realm of pop-psychology is Maurice Ravel, whose most famous work 'Bolero' is thought have been the result of frontotemporal dementia. Strictly speaking, Ravel shouldn't have amounted to much after his brain started deteriorating, but the dementia directly underlies the repetitive rhythms that make 'Bolero' a creative masterpiece.
While physical exercise (and a few other mental 'exercises' such as bi-linguality) has been shown to be supremely important to stem age-related mental decay, I find your comment to be a bit too pessimistic.
This brings up an interesting question: how do statistical results relate to self-actuation and motivation? When presented with such statistics as in your comment, one can either give up on making lifestyle changes with a resignation to 'inevitable aging', or may look at the statistics as a motivating factor to remain an exception.
The authors of your reference 2 state this in the conclusions: "Importantly, these findings also suggest that neurobiological aging does not always lead to neurocognitive decline in a uniform manner, and that external experiences can modulate and perhaps alleviate some of the neural effects of aging in the brain."
[1] Bruce A. Weinberg & David W. Galenson, 2005.
"Creative Careers: The Life Cycles of Nobel Laureates in Economics,"
NBER Working Papers 11799, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. http://www.nber.org/papers/w11799.pdf?new_window=1
*Edit: I meant Paul Cezanne, Robert Frost, and Virginia Woolf.
The use of IQ is usually criticized in the context of comparing one person to another. What we're talking about here is the effect for a fixed individual. If all else is equal, is higher IQ more advantageous? Probably.
Other counter-examples to the general trend of 'age-related mental deterioration' include several greats in creative fields (e.g. P̶a̶b̶l̶o̶ ̶P̶i̶c̶a̶s̶s̶o̶,̶ ̶T̶.̶ ̶S̶ ̶E̶l̶i̶o̶t̶ Paul Cezanne, Robert Frost, etc.) [1] whose best work came later in life. All said and done, it is hard to quantify success and definitively relate quantifiable functions of the brain with 'success' and 'creativity'. An extreme example in the realm of pop-psychology is Maurice Ravel, whose most famous work 'Bolero' is thought have been the result of frontotemporal dementia. Strictly speaking, Ravel shouldn't have amounted to much after his brain started deteriorating, but the dementia directly underlies the repetitive rhythms that make 'Bolero' a creative masterpiece.
While physical exercise (and a few other mental 'exercises' such as bi-linguality) has been shown to be supremely important to stem age-related mental decay, I find your comment to be a bit too pessimistic.
This brings up an interesting question: how do statistical results relate to self-actuation and motivation? When presented with such statistics as in your comment, one can either give up on making lifestyle changes with a resignation to 'inevitable aging', or may look at the statistics as a motivating factor to remain an exception.
The authors of your reference 2 state this in the conclusions: "Importantly, these findings also suggest that neurobiological aging does not always lead to neurocognitive decline in a uniform manner, and that external experiences can modulate and perhaps alleviate some of the neural effects of aging in the brain."
[1] Bruce A. Weinberg & David W. Galenson, 2005. "Creative Careers: The Life Cycles of Nobel Laureates in Economics," NBER Working Papers 11799, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. http://www.nber.org/papers/w11799.pdf?new_window=1
*Edit: I meant Paul Cezanne, Robert Frost, and Virginia Woolf.