Cited by 3,560Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesCognitive Abilities and TestingNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism

N-back working memory paradigm: a meta-analysis of normative functional neuroimaging studies.

Open access
Owen, Adrian M., McMillan, Kathryn M., Laird, Angela R., Bullmore, Ed·2005·Human Brain Mapping

Abstract

One of the most popular experimental paradigms for functional neuroimaging studies of working memory has been the n‐back task, in which subjects are asked to monitor the identity or location of a series of verbal or nonverbal stimuli and to indicate when the currently presented stimulus is the same as the one presented n trials previously. We conducted a quantitative meta‐analysis of 668 sets of activation coordinates in Talairach space reported in 24 primary studies of n‐back task variants manipulating process (location vs. identity monitoring) and content (verbal or nonverbal) of working memory. We found the following cortical regions were activated robustly (voxelwise false discovery rate = 1%): lateral premotor cortex; dorsal cingulate and medial premotor cortex; dorsolateral and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex; frontal poles; and medial and lateral posterior parietal cortex. Subsidiary meta‐analyses based on appropriate subsets of the primary data demonstrated broadly similar activation patterns for identity monitoring of verbal stimuli and both location and identity monitoring of nonverbal stimuli. There was also some evidence for distinct frontoparietal activation patterns in response to different task variants. The functional specializations of each of the major cortical components in the generic large‐scale frontoparietal system are discussed. We conclude that quantitative meta‐analysis can be a powerful tool for combining results of multiple primary studies reported in Talairach space. Here, it provides evidence both for broadly consistent activation of frontal and parietal cortical regions by various versions of the n‐back working memory paradigm, and for process‐ and content‐specific frontoparietal activation by working memory. Hum Brain Mapp 25:46–59, 2005. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hbm.20131

Cites

88 of 88 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Complex span tasks and the n-back are two commonly used task types for assessing individual differences in working memory capacity.

    “Two types of tasks are frequently used to measure individual differences in working memory capacity-complex span tasks and the n-back”
  • In neuroscientific research, the n-back has been the most common measure of working memory capacity.

    “In neuroscientific research, by contrast, the n-back has been the most prevalent measure of working memory capacity (Owen et al., 2005;Wager & Smith, 2003).”
  • For working memory, the forward inference map revealed the most consistent associations in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), anterior insula and dorsal medial frontal cortex (MFC).

    “For working memory, the forward inference map revealed the most consistent associations in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), anterior insula and dorsal medial frontal cortex (MFC), replicating previous findings15,20.”
  • The N-back and Trail Making Test involve DLPFC.

    “these tests involve DLPFC (Owen et al. 2005, Zakzanis et al. 2005) and are sensitive to mTBI (Arciniega et al. 2021, Li et al. 2023).”
  • The n-back task is a common and well-established continuous performance test for measurements of working memory performance.

    “The n-back task is a common and well-established continuous performance test for measurements of working memory performance [33], [34].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Owen, A. M., McMillan, K. M., Laird, A. R., & Bullmore, E.
Affiliations
  • MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit (GB)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • The University of Texas at San Antonio Health Science Center (US)
Venue
Human Brain Mapping
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-04-21
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
46-59
ISSN
  • 1065-9471 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0193
OpenAlex
W2000697043
Cited by
3,560
References
88
Citations by year
2026: 175 · 2025: 212 · 2024: 242 · 2023: 206 · 2022: 200 · 2021: 234 · 2020: 204 · 2019: 230 · 2018: 243 · 2017: 218 · 2016: 195 · 2015: 207 · 2014: 191 · 2013: 181 · 2012: 161
FWCI
24.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Human Brain Mapping (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Keywords
n-back task, working memory, functional neuroimaging, brain activation, prefrontal cortex, parietal cortex, premotor cortex
MeSH terms
Brain, Diagnostic Imaging, Humans, Memory, Psychomotor Performance, Meta-Analysis as Topic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review