The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
What does It take to Show that a Cognitive Training Procedure is Useful?
Abstract
Individuals substantially improve with training, indicating that a large degree of plasticity is retained across ages. In the past 20 years, many studies explored the ability to boost cognitive skills (reasoning, linguistic abilities, working memory, and attention) by training with other tasks that exploit limited cognitive resources. Indeed, individuals with long-term training on challenging skills (musicians and action video gamers) show impressive behavior on related tasks (linguistic and visual attention, respectively). However, a critical evaluation of training studies that last weeks to months shows typically mild effects, mainly with respect to control groups that either did not practice or practiced with less challenging, rewarding, or exciting conditions. These findings suggest that future training studies should evaluate these factors carefully and assess whether they mainly impact the testing sessions or actual longer-term skills, and whether their impact can be further strengthened. The lack of a comprehensive theory of learning that integrates cognitive, motivational, and alertness aspects poses a bottleneck to improving current training procedures.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 122 · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- Jacoby, N., & Ahissar, M.
- Affiliations
- Bar-Ilan University (IL)
- Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
- Corresponding author
- Jacoby, Nori
- Venue
- Progress in Brain Research
- Publisher
- Elsevier
- Published
- 2013
- Volume
- 207
- Pages
- 121-140
- ISSN
- 0079-6123 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1541705426
- Cited by
- 30
- References
- 122
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 15.77
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Progress in brain research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Keywords
- cognitive training, transfer of training, neuroplasticity, working memory, attention, musicians, video gamers, motivation, alertness, learning theory
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Brain, Cognition, Humans, Memory, Short-Term, Neuronal Plasticity, Practice, Psychological
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