For decades, researchers have known that cognitive performance correlates with how long people live. However, a new study has illuminated a more nuanced aspect of this relationship—revealing that not all mental abilities hold equal weight when it comes to predicting longevity. According to recent findings published in Psychological Science, a specific cognitive skill verbal fluency emerged as a striking predictor of lifespan among older adults, even more so than general intelligence or memory. Individuals capable of swiftly naming animals or generating words beginning with a specific letter were found to live substantially longer, with a difference in median survival time approaching nine years between those with high and low performance in this area.
This research was conducted with the aim of addressing a longstanding question in aging science: Do certain types of intelligence hold greater predictive value for survival than others? While numerous earlier studies have linked higher intelligence with longer life, many of them relied on isolated assessments rather than tracking cognitive changes over time. Moreover, debates have persisted over whether it is a person’s average cognitive level or their rate of cognitive decline that provides more insight into their longevity prospects.
To deepen understanding in this domain, the team of researchers behind the current study turned to a robust longitudinal dataset drawn from the Berlin Aging Study—a well-regarded research project involving very old adults. This allowed them to examine multiple types of mental abilities side by side while also capturing how those abilities evolved as participants aged.
“The connection between cognitive ability and survival has been established in scientific literature for quite some time,” said Paolo Ghisletta, lead author and professor of psychology at the University of Geneva. “More recently, increasing evidence has pointed toward the relevance of cognitive changes over time, not merely static ability levels, in predicting longevity.”
Thanks to improved data collection practices in recent decades, it has now become possible to analyze long-term cognitive trajectories alongside mortality outcomes. Ghisletta and his colleagues, working with the Max Planck Institute for Human Development in Berlin, capitalized on a particularly rich dataset in which participants’ mental abilities were assessed up to 14 times over an 18-year period. The initial age range of the study’s participants spanned from 70 to 104 years, with an average age of 85.
Notably, all of the individuals included in the analysis had already passed away by the time of the study, which provided researchers with complete data for evaluating the relationship between cognitive function and lifespan.
Read more: How to Easily Spot Toxic Positivity—and Protect Your Mental Health
A Deeper Look into Mental Abilities and Survival
Participants completed nine cognitive tasks, grouped into four broad domains: perceptual speed, episodic memory, verbal fluency, and verbal knowledge. A general intelligence score was also computed, incorporating performance across all tasks. To ensure a sophisticated understanding of how these abilities influenced survival, the researchers employed an advanced statistical technique known as a joint multivariate longitudinal survival model. This powerful method allowed for a simultaneous examination of cognitive change and mortality risk something that previous studies had rarely attempted in a comprehensive way.
One result stood out clearly: verbal fluency especially the ability to quickly generate animal names or words beginning with the letter “s” emerged as the only cognitive skill that uniquely predicted how long people lived. This predictive capacity held up even when other abilities and general intelligence were taken into account. People who performed better on these fluency tasks were observed to live up to nine years longer than their lower-scoring counterparts.
“At the population level, it’s clear that greater cognitive ability is associated with longer survival,” Ghisletta told PsyPost. “In addition, the rate at which cognitive abilities decline also appears to play a role—those who decline faster tend to have shorter life spans. Among all the cognitive skills we studied, verbal fluency demonstrated the strongest and most consistent link to longevity.”
However, Ghisletta emphasized that population-level associations should not be mistaken for individual predictions. It would be inappropriate, he cautioned, to assume that a person struggling to recall animal names is necessarily nearing the end of life.
“It would be an error to infer that someone’s inability to name another fruit means they are on a terminal cognitive slope,” he noted.
Why Verbal Fluency Matters
Unlike tasks that focus on a single mental function, verbal fluency draws upon multiple domains of cognition simultaneously. Successfully performing such tasks requires access to long-term memory, a strong vocabulary, sustained attention, and the ability to flexibly shift between conceptual categories. These functions engage a variety of brain regions and systems, many of which are known to be particularly vulnerable to the effects of aging and neurodegeneration.
Previous studies have already shown that verbal fluency often declines early in the course of neurodegenerative diseases such as dementia or Parkinson’s disease, reinforcing the idea that this skill serves as a sensitive barometer of overall brain health. Moreover, verbal fluency tasks place considerable demands on the prefrontal cortex, a region implicated in both executive function and language production—and one that deteriorates more markedly with age.
What sets verbal fluency apart may be its ability to straddle both fluid and crystallized intelligence. The former refers to the capacity to reason and solve new problems quickly, while the latter involves knowledge and skills accumulated over a lifetime. Since verbal fluency relies on both types, it may serve as a more holistic marker of cognitive resilience.
“I had initially expected that perceptual speed would show a similarly strong association with longevity,” Ghisletta admitted. “These tasks, which involve rapidly comparing symbols or numbers under time pressure, are known for their sensitivity in detecting cognitive decline. However, they were ultimately less predictive of survival than the verbal fluency tasks.”
Read more: Alarming Alzheimer’s Map Reveals the U.S. States With the Highest Risk Level
Statistical Advances and Methodological Strengths
A key strength of the study lies in its use of a joint modeling approach, which allowed for the integration of both cognitive trajectories and time-to-death in a single analysis. In contrast, earlier studies often relied on two-stage models, first examining cognitive changes and then separately linking those changes to survival outcomes. Such segmented analyses can introduce bias or obscure important connections.
By simultaneously modeling cognitive change and mortality, Ghisletta and colleagues were able to more accurately quantify how certain mental abilities—not just their level, but also their rate of change—relate to how long someone is likely to live.
Still, like all research, this study is not without its limitations. The participant sample, while robust in terms of age diversity and assessment duration, was not fully representative of the broader population. All individuals were from Berlin, with most born between 1887 and 1922, and the study sample was intentionally stratified by age and sex. As such, it remains uncertain whether the findings would generalize to younger individuals, or to populations from other regions and cultural backgrounds.
Read more:101-Year-Old Doctor Is Still Driving, Shares His 7 Tips For A Long Life
“Every study has its caveats,” Ghisletta acknowledged. “While the Berlin Aging Study was carefully designed, its very specificity makes it difficult to generalize findings to all 70-plus-year-olds. Furthermore, we were unable to examine underlying biological or neurological mechanisms that might link cognitive decline and reduced longevity.”
Future research may seek to fill these gaps by incorporating biomarkers of aging, brain imaging data, and more diverse cohorts. Investigations could also explore whether interventions aimed at improving or preserving verbal fluency—through language-rich activities, social engagement, or cognitive training—might lead to tangible improvements in health outcomes or even extended lifespan.
Implications and Future Directions
Despite its limitations, the study provides compelling evidence that verbal fluency can serve as a powerful window into cognitive aging and biological resilience. Its predictive value surpasses that of other, more commonly used indicators of intelligence and memory. If future studies can replicate these findings across broader and more varied samples, verbal fluency could become a key tool in assessing health risks and guiding intervention strategies for older adults.
“Ideally, our work will be followed by even more comprehensive studies capable of probing the mechanisms that link intelligence to lifespan,” said Ghisletta. “Such research can only succeed through collaboration among scientists from diverse fields who are committed to sharing data, tools, and insights.”
The study—“Verbal Fluency Selectively Predicts Survival in Old and Very Old Age”—was authored by Paolo Ghisletta, Stephen Aichele, Denis Gerstorf, Angela Carollo, and Ulman Lindenberger, representing a concerted effort to understand how our minds may hold the key to our mortality.
