[TeaDrunk]

I don't think the paper implies any causality either way. Notice that the title of the paper itself is "The neurobiology of life course socioeconomic conditions and *associated* cognitive performance in middle to late adulthood"

Really, this is editorializing on the part of the person who submitted this link to HN.

[hn_throwaway_99]

I don't quite agree. While the paper is much less sensational than the submission title, the way the abstract reads clearly sounds like they are at least implying some causality, subconsciously or not.

Take the sentence "Individuals from higher income households showed preserved cognitive performance..." That could just as easily be written "Individuals with preserved cognitive performance showed higher levels of income..." There are a bunch of similar examples like that throughout the abstract.

[TeaDrunk]

TBH That's literal nitpicks. Nowhere in the paper is a causal relationship proposed. Your statement that a potential subconscious proposition exists in the paper is windmill-tilting.

[tgv]

The wording is neutral and does not imply causality.

[metacritic12]

Yeah agreed the paper title itself isn't sensationalistic, but the submission title is.