Friday, July 02, 2004

Age, mental ability and marketing

This article appears in this week's Economist. You will need a subscription to access from the Economist web site.

How much account is taken of the changing (better word than declining) mental process by marketers? Hold on I have forgotten what the questions was - poor old cognitive power is on the decline. Answer, very littler to none.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Mental ability declines with age. That's the same for the brainy and the dim
Some abilities decline faster than others. According to most studies*, people's numerical and reasoning abilities are at their best in their 20s and early 30s. Other abilities—those that depend on knowledge, such as verbal abilities—may improve with age. One study, carried out in Seattle, suggests that verbal fluency peaks at 53, on average.
Measuring this sort of thing precisely is riddled with statistical pitfalls: as a cohort ages, for example, the frail, with low productivity, drop out. The survivors tend to be the brightest and toughest. That puts average scores up. On the other hand, improved education in past decades probably biases test scores against people too old to have benefited from it.
For most workers, decreased abilities will lead to lower productivity; only a minority will find know-how, knowledge and the ability to prattle convincingly outweighs their failing powers. And even for these, returns diminish: experience only counts for so much. This tilt is becoming steeper: technological change puts a premium on adaptability, and a discount on experience. Even those employees who remain highly productive will be likely to shine only in a narrow field.
Academics notice this. It's less clear that employers do. Studies of supervisors' ratings show no clear correlation between age and perceived productivity. When other employees' views are taken into account, though, the picture changes: these ratings suggest that workers in their 30s are the most productive and hardworking, with scores falling thereafter.


Economist Article Posted by Hello

No comments: