ABSTRACT
Quantitative research in aging is at an important crossroads. Theorists in a variety of substantive areas (e.g., cognition, memory, emotion) have tried to make important advances in the past few years, but the necessary empirical underpinnings tend to rely primarily on the methodological tools that have dominated the study of behavior, development, and change for the past several decades — the restrictive conceptions of static equilibrium, linearity, and additivity. It is time to push for the further development and adoption of alternative methodological approaches that embrace more dynamical and, when appropriate, nonlinear conceptions. It is also not amiss for methodologists to challenge the theorists to foster more dynamical concepts regarding the nature of aging. Looming in the interface of the method–theory collaboration is the fact that idiosyncrasies in stimulus perceptions and response patterns jeopardize analyses depending on the traditionally casual aggregation of data over experimental units. This matter will have to be addressed before the high levels of validity and precision we seek for lawful relationships can be attained.
