Cited by 267Cognitive Abilities and TestingCognitive Functions and MemoryNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function

Training the brain: fact and fad in cognitive and behavioral remediation.

Rabipour, Sheida, Raz, Amir·2012·Brain and Cognition

Abstract

Putatively safe and effective for improving cognitive performance in both health and disease, products purported to train the brain appeal to consumers and healthcare practitioners. In an increasingly health-centered society, these applications constitute a burgeoning commercial market. Sparse evidence coupled with lack of scientific rigor, however, leaves claims concerning the impact and duration of such brain training largely unsubstantiated. On the other hand, at least some scientific findings seem to support the effectiveness and sustainability of training for higher brain functions such as attention and working memory. In the present paper we provide a tectonic integration and synthesis of cognitive training approaches. Specifically, we sketch the relative merits and shortcomings of these programs, which often appeal to parents who must choose between side-effect-laden medication and other less conventional options. Here we examine how neuroplasticity allows the healthy as well the impaired to benefit from cognitive training programs. We evaluate the evidence and consider whether brain training can be a stand-alone treatment or an adjunct to pharmacotherapy, outline promising future prospects, and highlight what training outcomes are plausible in line with available data. Future research would determine whether the field of brain training realizes its potential to revolutionize education and rehabilitation or withers away engulfed in controversy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bandc.2012.02.006

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rabipour, S., & Raz, A.
Affiliations
McGill University (CA)
Corresponding author
Raz, Amir
Venue
Brain and Cognition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-07
Volume
79
Issue
2
Pages
159-179
ISSN
0278-2626 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2120670062
Cited by
267
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 9
FWCI
41.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Brain and Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
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 › Neuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function
Keywords
brain training, cognitive training, neuroplasticity, working memory, attention, cognitive remediation, pharmacotherapy, evidence base, rehabilitation
MeSH terms
Stroke Rehabilitation, Adult, Aged, Attention, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Behavior Therapy, Mental Disorders, Child, Cognition Disorders, Computer-Assisted Instruction, Humans, Memory, Short-Term, Neuronal Plasticity, Psychotherapy, Remedial Teaching, Transfer, Psychology, Executive Function, Neurofeedback

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