CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 238Cognitive Abilities and TestingCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skillsCognitive Functions and Memory

Working memory training involves learning new skills

Open access
Gathercole, Susan E., Dunning, Darren L., Holmes, Joni, Norris, Dennis·2019·Journal of Memory and Language
DOI 10.1016/j.jml.2018.10.003PMC PMC6591133
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We present a new framework characterizing training-induced changes in WM as the acquisition of novel cognitive routines akin to learning a new skill. Predictions were tested in three studies analyzing the transfer between WM tasks following WM training. Study 1 reports a meta-analysis establishing substantial transfer when trained and untrained tasks shared either a serial recall, complex span or backward span paradigm. Transfer was weaker for serial recall of verbal than visuo-spatial material, suggesting that this paradigm is served by an existing verbal STM system and does not require a new routine. Re-analysis of published WM training data in Study 2 showed that transfer was restricted to tasks sharing properties proposed to require new routines. In a re-analysis of data from four studies, Study 3 demonstrated that transfer was greatest for children with higher fluid cognitive abilities. These findings suggest that development of new routines depends on general cognitive resources and that they can only be applied to other similarly-structured tasks.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

The paper proposes that working memory (WM) training produces transfer mainly when training requires learning a new cognitive routine, akin to acquiring a cognitive skill, rather than by generally expanding WM capacity. Across a meta-analysis and two re-analyses of child training data, transfer was strongest for tasks sharing paradigms thought to require new routines, such as visuo-spatial serial recall, complex span, and backward span.

Key findings

  • In Study 1, across 24 RCTs and 113 trained–untrained task pairs, mean transfer was small-to-moderate (d = 0.42); transfer was high when tasks shared a paradigm: serial recall matched d = 0.709, complex span matched d = 0.540, backward span matched d = 0.901.
  • Visuo-spatial serial recall showed larger matched transfer (d = 1.054) than verbal serial recall (d = 0.508), and complex span transfer was substantial within domain (d = 0.540) but absent cross-domain (d = 0.119).
  • In Study 2 (n = 106 children with low WM), adaptive Cogmed training produced transfer for dot matrix (d = 0.92), backward digits (d = 0.77), and Mr. X (d = 0.58), but weak digit span transfer (d = 0.29); verbal and performance IQ showed evidence for the null.
  • In Study 3 (n = 108 children), all four WM tests improved after adaptive training (dot matrix d = 1.27, backward digit span d = 0.96, Mr. X d = 0.75, digit span d = 0.37); baseline performance IQ predicted dot matrix and Mr. X (p < .005), backward digit span (p < .05), but not digit span.

Methods

  • Study 1: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of adaptive WM training with active control conditions, restricted to ordered recall tasks; 24 studies yielded 113 trained–untrained task pairs, analyzed with random-effects models, Cohen’s d, moderator analyses, heterogeneity, and publication-bias checks.
  • Study 2: re-analysis of two published studies of children aged 7–12 with low WM (n = 106) who completed adaptive or non-adaptive Cogmed RM; transfer tests were AWMA digit span, dot matrix, backward digit span, and Mr. X, plus WASI verbal and performance IQ; analyses used GLMs and Bayesian regressions.
  • Study 3: re-analysis of four WM training studies (n = 108 children, including low-WM, ADHD, and typically developing samples) all completing adaptive Cogmed RM; individual differences in post-training AWMA WM scores were predicted from baseline WM, verbal IQ, and performance IQ using GLMs and Bayesian regressions.

Limitations

  • The paper states that Study 1’s independent feature coding is limited because matched features are often correlated, making it hard to identify the critical feature; for example, matched digits were confounded with backward span, and verbal material was confounded with shared paradigm.
  • The paper states that Study 2’s participants were all children with low WM, so generalization to other populations or ages is undetermined; Study 3’s sample was cognitively heterogeneous and unusual, so generalization requires further data.
  • The paper also notes insufficient data for updating paradigms, limited generalization evidence for backward span because most verbal pairs differed only in response modality, and unresolved limits on intermediate-level routine transfer; evident from the text, the meta-analysis includes heterogeneous studies and some moderator analyses had fewer than 10 cases for features.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jml.2018.10.003

Cites

186 of 186 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 128 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    Study 1's meta-analysis found substantial transfer when trained and untrained tasks shared a serial recall, complex span, or backward span paradigm.

    “Study 1 reports a meta-analysis establishing substantial transfer when trained and untrained tasks shared either a serial recall, complex span or backward span paradigm.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingreasoning

    Transfer was weaker for serial recall of verbal material than for visuo-spatial material.

    “Transfer was weaker for serial recall of verbal than visuo-spatial material”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Study 2's re-analysis of published working memory training data showed transfer was restricted to tasks sharing properties proposed to require new routines.

    “Re-analysis of published WM training data in Study 2 showed that transfer was restricted to tasks sharing properties proposed to require new routines.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Study 3's re-analysis of data from four studies showed transfer was greatest for children with higher fluid cognitive abilities.

    “In a re-analysis of data from four studies, Study 3 demonstrated that transfer was greatest for children with higher fluid cognitive abilities.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    For digit stimuli, matched trained and untrained task pairs produced a large transfer effect, d = 0.994, p < .001.

    “The effect size was large for matched task pairs (d = 0.994, p < .001)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The coding of task features used in the meta-analysis validly captures the cognitive demands relevant to transfer.
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 54
  • May combine two claims. 77
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 11

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Two of the adult studies included a group of older participants aged 60+.

    “Two of these included a group of older participants (60+).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Across all 113 task pairs in the meta-analysis, the mean transfer effect size was d = 0.42, with SD = 0.54.

    “Across all 113 task pairs in the analysis, the mean effect size (d) was .42, SD = 0.54.”
    • Also stated in: § Discussion · plain
      “Across the 24 studies furnishing data for 113 pairs of trained and WM untrained tasks, the strength of transfer was small to moderate (d = 0.42).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The studies combined in the meta-analysis are sufficiently comparable for a random-effects synthesis despite variation in training programs, samples, and outcome measures.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Most studies involved a single group completing a single adaptive WM program.

    “Most studies involved a single group of participants completing a single adaptive WM program.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    In total, 113 pairs of trained and untrained WM tasks met the task selection criteria.

    “In total, 113 pairs of trained (T) and untrained (UT) WM tasks met the task selection criteria.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Participants were children or adolescents in 11 studies and adults aged 18 to 60 in the remaining nine studies.

    “Participants were children or adolescents in 11 studies and adults aged 18 to 60 years in the remaining nine studies.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    In 13 studies, the control group received a non-adaptive version of the WM training program fixed at low or no memory load.

    “In 13 studies the control group received a non-adaptive version of the WM training program that was fixed at a level of either low memory load or no memory load.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingcitation

    In four studies, different groups completed different WM training programs.

    “In four studies different groups completed different WM training programs: updating and Cogmed RM (Ang, Lee, Cheam, Poon, & Koh (2015); complex span and running span (Foster et al., 2017) complex span and simple span (Harrison et al. (2013); n-back and complex span (Minear et al., 2016).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Ang, Lee, Cheam, Poon, & Koh, 2015 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Foster et al., 2017

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Harrison et al., 2013 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Training groups in selected studies ranged from 14 to 62 participants, with mean 27 (median 24) for adaptive training and 26 (median 26) for active control.

    “Training groups ranged in size from 14 to 62 participants, with a mean group size of 27 (median = 24) for adaptive WM training and 26 (median = 26) for the active control group.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The remaining studies used adaptive programs that did not tax WM or activities assumed to place low demands on WM.

    “The remaining studies either employed adaptive programs that either did not tax WM at all (e.g., visual search training) or other activities assumed to place only low demands on WM (e.g., mathematics training, video games).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    For spatial location stimuli, feature match was not a significant moderator of transfer, p > .05.

    “Match was not a significant moderator of transfer (p > .05).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The coding of task features used in the meta-analysis validly captures the cognitive demands relevant to transfer.

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    For words and nonwords, feature match was not a significant moderator of transfer, p > .05.

    “Match was not a significant moderator of transfer (p > .05).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The coding of task features used in the meta-analysis validly captures the cognitive demands relevant to transfer.

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    For all serial recall tasks combined, feature match was a significant moderator of transfer, p < .001.

    “Match was a significant moderator of transfer (p < .001).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The coding of task features used in the meta-analysis validly captures the cognitive demands relevant to transfer.

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    For object stimuli, feature match was not a significant moderator of transfer, p > .05.

    “Match was not a significant moderator of transfer (p > .05).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The coding of task features used in the meta-analysis validly captures the cognitive demands relevant to transfer.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    All seven task pairs with matched digits used a backward span paradigm, which was also associated with a high transfer effect, d = 0.901.

    “all seven of the task pairs with matched digits employed a backward span paradigm which was also associated with a high level of transfer effect (d = 0.901).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The coding of task features used in the meta-analysis validly captures the cognitive demands relevant to transfer.

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    For all backward span tasks combined, feature match was a significant moderator of transfer, p < .05.

    “Feature match was a significant moderator of transfer (p < .05).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The coding of task features used in the meta-analysis validly captures the cognitive demands relevant to transfer.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Of 50 matched verbal pairs, 27 also shared the same paradigm, whereas none of the 14 unmatched verbal untrained tasks did.

    “of the 50 matched verbal pairs, 27 also had shared the same paradigm, whereas none of the 14 unmatched verbal untrained tasks did.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The coding of task features used in the meta-analysis validly captures the cognitive demands relevant to transfer.

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    For auditory stimulus modality, feature match was not a significant moderator of transfer, p > .05.

    “Match was not a significant moderator of transfer (p > .05).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The coding of task features used in the meta-analysis validly captures the cognitive demands relevant to transfer.

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    For spoken response modality, feature match was not a significant moderator of transfer, p > .05.

    “Match was not a significant moderator of transfer (p > .05).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The coding of task features used in the meta-analysis validly captures the cognitive demands relevant to transfer.

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    For visuo-spatial stimulus domain, feature match was not a significant moderator of transfer, p > .05.

    “Match was not a significant moderator of transfer (p > .05).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The coding of task features used in the meta-analysis validly captures the cognitive demands relevant to transfer.

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    For all complex span tasks combined, feature match was a significant moderator of transfer, p < .001.

    “The match was a significant moderator of transfer (p < .001).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The coding of task features used in the meta-analysis validly captures the cognitive demands relevant to transfer.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Dot matrix, backward digit span, and Mr. X were related to their own baseline scores but more weakly than digit span.

    “Dot matrix, backward digit span and Mr. X were also related to their own baseline scores, although here the strength of association was much weaker than for digit span.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Training condition effect was non-significant for verbal IQ but significant for performance IQ.

    “The effect of training condition on verbal IQ was non-significant (p > .05) for verbal IQ but significant for performance IQ (p < .05).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Digit span post-training was strongly related to pre-training digit span but not to verbal or performance IQ.

    “Digit span was very strongly related to digit span prior to training but was not linked with either verbal or performance IQ.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For digit span, the transfer effect size was 0.29 and the evidence was inconclusive.

    “For digit span, the transfer effect size was 0.29 and the evidence did not favor either the null or alternative hypothesis (effect size of 0.29).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For Mr. X, Bayesian evidence substantially supported a training effect, with a transfer effect size of .58.

    “For Mr. X there was substantial support for the alternative hypothesis and a transfer effect size of.58.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Pre-training performance IQ predicted dot matrix and Mr. X (p < .005) and backward digit span (p < .05).

    “Pre-training performance IQ significantly predicted dot matrix and Mr. X scores (p < .005 in both cases) and, less strongly, backward digit span (p < .05).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In all meta-analytic cases where both tasks used digits as memory items, they also happened to be backward span tasks, but the two features were analyzed independently.

    “in all cases in which both tasks in the meta-analysis employed digits as the memory items, they also happened to be backward span tasks, but the two features were analyzed independently.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The coding of task features used in the meta-analysis validly captures the cognitive demands relevant to transfer.

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    The two highest-transfer tasks were dot matrix (spatial locations) and backward digit recall.

    “These tasks involve the recall of spatial locations (dot matrix) and the recall of digits in reverse sequence.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    Transfer effect sizes were 0.92 for dot matrix and 0.77 for backward digit span.

    “The effect sizes for transfer were 0.92 and 0.77, respectively.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Effect sizes were 1.27 for dot matrix, 0.96 for backward digit span, 0.75 for Mr. X, and 0.37 for digit span.

    “The effect sizes were large for both dot matrix (1.27) and backward digit span (0.96), moderate for Mr. X (0.75) and small for digit span (0.37).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Bayesian evidence was substantial for the null for digit span, anecdotal for the alternative for backward span, and strong for the alternative for dot matrix and Mr. X.

    “Bayesian analysis provided substantial evidence for the null hypothesis for digit span, anecdotal evidence for the alternative hypothesis for backward span and strong support for the alternative hypothesis for both dot matrix and Mr. X.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Verbal serial recall transfer magnitude was significantly lower than visuo-spatial recall in Study 1 and very weak in Study 2.

    “However, its magnitude was significantly lower than for visuo-spatial recall in Study 1 and in the training study (Study 2), it was very weak.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    Data were insufficient for corresponding analysis of the two updating paradigms.

    “Data were insufficient for corresponding analysis of the two updating paradigms.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Transfer across complex span occurred only when the stimulus domain was matched; it did not extend across domains.

    “However, this was true only when the stimulus domain was also matched across the two tasks (verbal or verbal, or visuo-spatial to visuo-spatial): transfer did not extend across complex span tasks in which the domains differed.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Training-induced transfer occurs only when a new complex cognitive skill has been learned during training and that skill can be applied to a novel task.

    “Our claim is that training-induced transfer occurs only when we have learned a new complex cognitive skill in the course of training and when that skill can be applied to a novel task.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Training on unfamiliar working memory tasks leads to development of novel cognitive routines that control the sequence of cognitive processes required to perform the task.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: These routines can be applied only to other tasks with common structures, and only then will transfer occur.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The serial recall paradigm is served by an existing verbal short-term memory system and does not require a new routine.

    “suggesting that this paradigm is served by an existing verbal STM system and does not require a new routine.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In Minear et al. (2016), participants trained on spatial n-back or verbal complex span reported different strategies despite letters being the memoranda, and no transfer to serial recall of letters was found.

    “Although letters were the memoranda in both cases, participants reported different strategies.”
    • Also stated in: § Process-specific transfer · plain
      “No such benefits were found.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Minear et al. (2016) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    This is not necessarily the case for working memory training, in which some paradigms are more trainable than others.

    “We will see later that this is not necessarily the case for WM training, in which some paradigms are more trainable than others.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    These gains have been found at all ages from preschool to late adulthood and for individuals with various developmental and acquired disorders.

    “These gains have been found at all ages from the preschool years through to late adulthood, and for individuals with a range of developmental and acquired disorders of cognition (Karbach & Verhaeghen, 2014; Melby-Lervåg & Hulme, 2013; Sonuga-Barke et al., 2013; Wass, Scerif, & Johnson, 2012).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Karbach & Verhaeghen, 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Melby-Lervåg & Hulme, 2013 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Sonuga-Barke et al., 2013 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Chase and Ericsson's study showed that an individual's digit span expanded from seven to 79 items after two years of training by recoding digits into running times, while letter span did not change.

    “SF began with a typical digit span of seven items which had expanded to 79 items after two years of training. He reported that this was achieved by recoding digit sequences into long-distance running times that he was familiar with as a runner. Tellingly, his memory span for letter sequences over the same period did not change.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Chase and Ericsson’s (1981)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Primitive elements theory places no limits on the transferability of task-general skills across tasks.

    “Primitive elements theory places no limits on the transferability of task-general skills across tasks: transfer may in principle occur for any tasks requiring common higher-order processes such as proactive control.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Taatgen (2013) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    This learning is conceptualized as development of cognitive routines that coordinate execution of the processes necessary for an unfamiliar task.

    “This learning is conceptualized as the development of cognitive routines that coordinate the execution of the processes necessary to perform an unfamiliar task.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The magnitude of transfer is related to the extent of task overlap, with highest transfer for tasks with the greatest numbers of shared features.

    “One proposal is that the magnitude of transfer is related to the extent of task overlap, with highest levels of transfer for tasks with the greatest numbers of shared task features (Soveri et al., 2017).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Soveri et al., 2017

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    In the initial stages of a complex working memory task, general cognitive resources are required to determine the optimal sequence of processes and to execute the routine.

    “In the initial stages of performing a complex WM task, general cognitive resources are required to determine the optimal sequence of the processes, and to execute the routine.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    For complex working memory tasks, routines are envisaged to have a hierarchical structure composed in part of sub-routines repeatedly executed across a trial.

    “For complex WM tasks, it is envisaged that the routines will have a hierarchical structure composed in part of sub-routines repeatedly executed across the course of a trial.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    For typical participants in working memory training studies, many basic processes of storage and retrieval within working memory are already fully established and have reached the autonomous stage.

    “A reasonable expectation is that for typical participants in WM training studies many of the basic processes of storage and retrieval within WM will already be fully established and will have reached the autonomous stage.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Serial recall of verbal material is supported by a multi-component system of verbal short-term memory.

    “Serial recall of verbal material is supported by a multi-component system of verbal STM.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Burgess & Hitch, 1992

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Page & Norris, 1998

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    As skills required for everyday verbal short-term memory tasks are already acquired, no new routines are needed, and without new routines there is no routine-mediated transfer.

    “As the skills required to perform these tasks will have already been acquired there will be no need to develop new routines. If no new routines are developed, there will necessarily be no routine-mediated transfer.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Recoding strategies may deepen processing, create multiple representations per item, and combine items into chunks.

    “These recoding strategies may increase the depth of processing (Craik & Lockhart, 1972), permit the generation of multiple representations for each item (Paivio, 1990) and allow multiple items to be formed into single chunks (Cowan, Chen, & Rouder, 2004).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Craik & Lockhart, 1972 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Paivio, 1990

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Cowan, Chen, & Rouder, 2004

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    There may be choices about the particular forms of routines that influence transfer.

    “Continuing with the computing analogy, we can see that there may be choices about the particular forms of software (routines) that will influence transfer.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Training gains can extend to serial recall for untrained verbal content; Comblain (1994) showed training individuals with Down syndrome to rehearse word lists led to benefits in digit span.

    “Training gains can extend to serial recall for untrained verbal content: Comblain (1994) showed that training individuals with Down syndrome to rehearse word lists led to benefits in digit span.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Comblain (1994) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The basic capacity of the system would be unchanged but because its software differs, so too will the extent of transfer.

    “The basic capacity of the system would be unchanged but because its software differs, so too will the extent of transfer.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In verbal memory, when list length is near span, phonological coding is the main basis, but for lists beyond span non-phonological strategies may take over.

    “When the number of items to be recalled is close to span, verbal memory depends primarily on phonological coding, although for supra-span sequences there may be a shift to non-phonological strategies (Gathercole & Baddeley, 1990; Salamé & Baddeley, 1982).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Gathercole & Baddeley, 1990 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Salamé & Baddeley, 1982

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    If a routine is already well-established, there will be little scope for either training or transfer even if trained and untrained tasks call upon the same routines and processes.

    “If a routine is already well-established there will be little scope for either training or transfer even if the trained and untrained tasks both call upon the same routines and processes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Neither training nor transfer would be expected for tasks supported by systems such as verbal short-term memory that are already fully established.

    “Neither training nor transfer would therefore be expected for tasks supported by systems such as verbal STM that are already fully established.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationcitation

    One domain where basic cognitive routines are already well established is verbal short-term memory.

    “One domain where the basic cognitive routines will already be well established is verbal short-term memory (STM).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The encoding of item and order information and maintenance rehearsal are core elements of verbal short-term memory that account for many key verbal serial recall phenomena.

    “The encoding of item and order information and the engagement of a maintenance rehearsal process are core elements of this system which can readily account for many key verbal serial recall phenomena (Burgess & Hitch, 1992; Page & Norris, 1998).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Burgess & Hitch, 1992

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Page & Norris, 1998

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    A new routine is needed to marshal and execute existing processes in a novel sequence when a task has complex and unfamiliar cognitive requirements.

    “A new routine is needed to martial and execute existing processes in a novel sequence when a task has complex and unfamiliar cognitive requirements.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    In older children and adults, the rehearsal routine is already well-established and hence not amenable to further training.

    “In older children and adults, the routine will already be well-established and hence not be amenable to further training.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Established processes involved in encoding verbal item and order information are not amenable to further training.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Strategies involve coordination of working memory processes with long-term memory systems, and a new cognitive skill or routine has to be learned to do this.

    “In these ways, strategies involve the coordination of processes in WM with systems in long-term memory. To do this, we propose that a new cognitive skill (or routine) has to be learned.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Coping with these unfamiliar conditions requires developing novel cognitive routines.

    “To cope with these unfamiliar conditions it will be necessary to develop novel cognitive routines.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Backward recall is generally slower and more error-prone than forward recall.

    “Compared with forward recall, backward recall is generally slow (Anders & Lillyquist, 1971) and errorful (Isaacs and Vargha-Khadem, 1989).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Anders & Lillyquist, 1971

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Isaacs and Vargha-Khadem, 1989

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    N-back task demands are so unfamiliar and challenging that ready-to-go mechanisms cannot meet them, necessitating a new routine.

    “The first is that, irrespective of the specific cognitive processes required to support n-back, the task demands are so unfamiliar and challenging that they cannot be met by ready-to-go mechanisms. We argue that this necessitates the development of a new routine specifying the set of coordinated processes that need to be performed.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Because verbal STM storage is phonological rather than semantic, the same backward recall routine should extend to different verbal stimulus categories such as words, letters, and digits.

    “As storage in verbal STM is phonological rather than semantic in nature (Baddeley et al., 1975; Gathercole, Frankish, Pickering, & Peaker, 1999), the same routine should be readily extended to backward span tasks employing different categories of verbal stimuli such as word, letters and digits.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Baddeley et al., 1975 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Gathercole, Frankish, Pickering, & Peaker, 1999

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    This difference may allow training to develop or refine new cognitive routines tailored to unfamiliar task demands.

    “This may provide scope during training for the development of new cognitive routines (or the refinement of existing ones) tailored to meet the relatively unfamiliar task demands.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    N-back tasks can be performed in multiple ways, with most accounts focusing on updating the potential set of memory items, while alternatively participants might break and reconstruct item-order bindings.

    “There are a number of ways in which n-back tasks might be performed. Most accounts of n-back have focused on how the potential set of memory items might be updated with successive presentations. Alternatively, participants might repeatedly break and then reconstruct bindings between item and order information as each new item is presented.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Visuo-spatial STM depends more on general cognitive resources than verbal STM, which may be important for transfer.

    “A difference that may turn out to be important for transfer is that visual-spatial STM shows a greater dependence on general cognitive resources than verbal STM.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Other re-sequencing tasks (mixed numerical order, alphabetical order, semantic category) are unfamiliar and highly challenging.

    “These tasks are also unfamiliar and highly challenging.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    The basic mechanisms for encoding item and order information in verbal STM are present early in childhood and do not require new routines.

    “The basic mechanisms of encoding item and order information in verbal STM are already in place early in childhood and do not warrant new routines.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Routines should adapt readily to superficial task changes such as sensory modality of inputs or outputs.

    “We would certainly expect routines to adapt readily to changes in superficial task features such as the sensory modality of inputs or outputs that call on relatively peripheral and specialized processing systems, as these have few consequences for the higher-level structuring of task processes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    If so, visuo-spatial STM training should produce greater transfer to untrained tasks with similar recall demands than verbal STM training.

    “If so, training on visuo-spatial STM should generate greater transfer to untrained tasks with similar recall demands than the corresponding verbal STM tasks.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Chatham et al. developed a neurally inspired model of n-back that must be trained explicitly to perform the task with a specific n, consistent with n-back requiring a novel routine.

    “Chatham et al. (2011) developed a neurally inspired model of n-back. In line with the idea that n-back requires the development of a novel routine, it has to be trained explicitly to perform the task with a specific value of n.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Chatham et al., 2011 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    If backward recall of spatial sequences does not use the peeling-off strategy, verbal and visuo-spatial routines will differ substantially and transfer will be limited.

    “If this is the case, the routines verbal and visuo-spatial will differ substantially and this will limit transfer.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    There is more than one way to perform n-back, and individuals choose between alternative strategies and routines.

    “Second, there is more than one way to perform n-back and it looks as though individuals choose between alternative strategies, and hence routines.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Backward recall greatly reduces verbal memory span but has minimal impact on spatial sequence recall.

    “Whereas backward recall leads to much lower memory span for verbal stimuli, its impact is minimal when the task involves recalling spatial sequences (Isaacs and Vargha-Khadem, 1989).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Isaacs and Vargha-Khadem, 1989

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Verbal and visuo-spatial serial recall are both supported by domain-specific processes for encoding and maintaining item and order information.

    “In summary, verbal and visuo-spatial serial recall are both supported by domain-specific processes that encode and maintain item and order information.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Complex WM tasks require storing material under highly unfamiliar and challenging cognitive conditions.

    “They share the common feature of requiring participants to store material in highly unfamiliar and challenging cognitive conditions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    During training in serial recall of spatial locations, participants develop new cognitive routines that improve performance and reduce reliance on general cognitive resources.

    “It is therefore proposed that in the course of training in the serial recall of spatial locations, participants develop new cognitive routines that allow them to improve performance and diminish reliance on more general cognitive resources.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Because people readily translate between spoken, written, object, and image representations in comprehension, production, and reading, new routines should not be needed for transfer across modalities.

    “In comprehension, production and reading, we readily translate between representations in these different modalities, so it should be unnecessary to develop new routines to enable transfer across modalities.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Substantial routine-mediated transfer is predicted across tasks sharing these paradigms.

    “Substantial routine-mediated transfer is therefore predicted across task sharing these paradigms.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The cognitive routine framework predicts that training-related changes will be largest when participants perform unfamiliar WM activities requiring novel routines, because those routines can be applied to untrained tasks with the same requirements.

    “The framework predicts that training-related changes will be most substantial when participants have to perform unfamiliar WM activities that require the development of novel cognitive routines because these new routines can then be applied to untrained tasks sharing the same requirements.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Postle et al. proposed running span requires encoding, storage, rehearsal, discarding previously encoded items, and repositioning.

    “Postle, Berger, Goldstein, Curtis, and D'Esposito (2001) proposed that it requires not only encoding, storage and rehearsal but also the discarding of previously encoded items and repositioning.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Postle, Berger, Goldstein, Curtis, and D'Esposito, 2001

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Transfer was not expected to depend on whether input or output modalities were matched.

    “Transfer was not expected to be influenced by whether the input (memory items) or output (response) modalities were matched.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    According to Dahlin et al.'s process-specific account, both n-back and running span employ a common updating process that training can enhance, predicting transfer.

    “In contrast, according to the process-specific account of Dahlin et al. (2008), both tasks employ a common updating process that can be enhanced by training and will therefore show transfer.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dahlin et al., 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationcitation

    Transfer across verbal tasks should be independent of whether the semantic category of stimuli matches, regardless of whether stimuli are words, nonwords, digits, or letters.

    “We might therefore expect that transfer across verbal tasks will be independent of whether the semantic category of stimuli in trained and untrained tasks are matching, regardless of whether they are words, nonwords, digits, or letters.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    If training changes cognitive processes tied to specific features, transfer should be greater when that feature is also present in the untrained WM task.

    “If training induces changes in any of the cognitive processes associated with specific features of the trained activity, transfer should be greater when that feature is also present in the untrained WM task.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Novel routines are expected to develop during training for visuo-spatial but not verbal serial recall, for complex span, and for backward span.

    “We expect that novel routines will be developed during training for visuo-spatial but not verbal serial recall, for complex span, and for backward span.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Changes in stimulus domain (letters, digits), input modality, or response modality should not constrain transfer.

    “Changes within stimulus domain (e.g., letters, digits), the input modality of the memory items, or the modality of response should not constrain transfer.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Dahlin et al.'s data show transfer to an n-back task after running span training, but the study lacked an active control, potentially overestimating specificity to updating.

    “The data they report are consistent with this position, with transfer to an n-back task following training on running span. However, this study lacked an active control condition for comparison with running span training, potentially over-estimating the specificity of any training effects to updating in particular.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dahlin et al., 2008 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Serial recall for verbal items is not expected to require a new routine because the established verbal STM system fully serves it.

    “Serial recall for verbal items is not expected to require a new routine because it is fully served by the established system for encoding items and order information of verbal STM.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    In March 2018, two authors conducted separate comprehensive literature searches of Psych Info and Google Scholar.

    “In March 2018 separate comprehensive literature searches of the electronic databases Psych Info and Google Scholar were carried out by two authors (DD, JH).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    After duplicates were removed, two authors independently reviewed abstracts of remaining studies.

    “The searches were then collated and, after duplicates were removed, the abstracts of the remaining studies were independently reviewed (SG, DD).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Continuous updating in running span is highly unfamiliar and can only be performed by developing a new routine.

    “Continuous updating of the memory items to be potentially recalled is a highly unfamiliar activity that can only be performed by developing a new routine.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    On-task performance for complex WM tasks requiring novel routines should improve with training, and benefits should extend to similarly structured tasks.

    “As with all complex WM tasks requiring novel routines, on-task performance is expected to improve with training, and benefits should extend to other similarly-structured tasks.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Because verbal and spatial rehearsal depend on distinct underpinning systems, the two forms of rehearsal cannot readily be substituted for one another.

    “A consequence of the distinctiveness of these underpinning systems may be that the two forms of rehearsal cannot be readily substituted for one another.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Rehearsal depends on covert control of domain-specific action production systems: articulation for verbal rehearsal and eye movements for spatial rehearsal.

    “Rehearsal depends on the covert control of the relevant domain-specific action production systems - of articulation in the case of verbal rehearsal (Caplan, Rochon, & Waters, 1992; Waters et al., 1992) and of eye movements for spatial rehearsal (Pearson et al., 2014; Pearson & Sahraie, 2003).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Caplan, Rochon, & Waters, 1992

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Waters et al., 1992 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Pearson et al., 2014 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Backward span is a complex working memory task that existing short-term memory mechanisms do not readily serve because short-term memory represents serial order in a forward-going manner.

    “Backward span is another complex WM task that is not readily served by existing mechanisms in STM, as a consequence the forward-going representation of serial order in STM (Hurlstone et al., 2014).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hurlstone et al., 2014 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    More specific features such as stimulus category, stimulus domain, input modality, and output modality did not generate transfer.

    “In contrast, the following more specific features did not generate transfer: stimulus category (letters, words/ nonwords, objects, locations), the stimulus domain (verbal, visuo-spatial), input modality (auditory, visual), and output modality (manual, spoken).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    The same post hoc power analysis yielded power of .23 to detect a small effect size, f2 = 0.02.

    “The power to detect a medium effect size of f2 = 0.15 was .95, and .23 for a small effect size, f2 = 0.02.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The two child studies re-analyzed in Study 2 were not included in the meta-analysis and therefore provide an independent evaluation of the cognitive routine framework.

    “These studies were not included in the meta-analysis and therefore provide an independent evaluation of the cognitive routine framework.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    In each task pair with digits, both tasks also used a backward span paradigm, which is an alternative and possibly more plausible source of routine-mediated transfer.

    “However, in each of the task pairs included in this analysis, both tasks also employed a backward span paradigm and this is an alternative and possibly more plausible source of routine-mediated transfer.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The present findings show high transfer across backward span tasks, both for verbal stimuli and for cross-domain task pairs.

    “The present findings demonstrate high levels of transfer across backward span tasks, both for verbal stimuli and for cross-domain task pairs.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The performance IQ effect arose from greater post-training improvement in the non-adaptive than the adaptive group, so it does not reflect positive transfer.

    “This arose from a greater post-training improvement for the non-adaptive than the adaptive group and so does not reflect a positive transfer effect.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The large cross-modal transfer in backward span suggests that higher-order features of the routine can be adapted to fit new stimuli, although the data are restricted to two task pairs.

    “The large degree of cross-modal transfer in backward span suggests that higher-order features of the routine can be adapted to fit new stimuli, although here the data are restricted to just two task pairs.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    The same post hoc power analysis yielded power of .95 to detect a medium effect size, f2 = 0.15.

    “The power to detect a medium effect size of f2 = 0.15 was .95, and .23 for a small effect size, f2 = 0.02.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The present findings strongly support the position that neither a common input nor a common output modality has any impact on transfer.

    “The present findings provide strong support for this position: neither a common input nor output modality had any impact on transfer.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The verbal STM system meets the needs of verbal serial recall tasks, so no transfer occurs.

    “The verbal STM system amply meets the needs of verbal serial recall tasks and will therefore not lead to transfer.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    A post hoc power analysis with total N = 106 yielded power of .99 to detect a large effect size, f2 = 0.35, with linear regression at p = .05.

    “A post hoc power analysis with a total N of 106 yielded power of .99 to detect a large effect size, f2 = 0.35, with linear regression at p = .05.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Participants from Holmes et al. were excluded from Study 1 because they were not randomly allocated to adaptive and non-adaptive training; they were recruited sequentially using identical criteria.

    “Participants in the Holmes et al. study were excluded from Study 1 because they were not randomly allocated to the adaptive and non-adaptive training conditions; instead, they were recruited sequentially (adaptive first, then non-adaptive) using identical recruitment criteria.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Cognitive routines may depend on the same general attentional resources critical for restructuring in nonverbal reasoning.

    “Perhaps, then, cognitive routines depend on the same general attentional resources believed to be critical for the restructuring process in the context of nonverbal reasoning tasks.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The meta-analysis included heterogeneous studies, with variation in training activities, training regimens, transfer tests, active control conditions, participants, and sample sizes.

    “One of these is the heterogeneity of the studies included in the meta-analysis: there was variation in the training activities, training regimens, the transfer tests, the active control conditions, the participants, and sample sizes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Verbal serial recall transfer extended across different stimuli such as letters, digits, and words, suggesting that it does not originate from material-specific mnemonic strategies.

    “However, it extended across different stimuli (letters, digits, words), suggesting that it does not originate from material-specific mnemonic strategies.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    High digit transfer could be because participants developed digit-specific recoding strategies during training, as reported in previous studies of lengthy intensive digit span training.

    “This could be because participants developed digit-specific recoding strategies during training, as reported in previous studies of lengthy intensive training in digit span (Ericsson & Simon, 1981).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ericsson & Simon, 1981

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Switching peripheral settings should not affect other elements or subroutines or alter information flow.

    “Switching between these settings should not have an impact on other elements and subroutines: borrowing Taatgen’s (2013) terminology, they should not alter the flow of information processing across the system.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Taatgen’s (2013)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Transfer should occur across low-level settings, as found in Study 1.

    “There should therefore be transfer across low-level settings, as was indeed found in Study 1.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisenone given

    Peripheral processes include task-specific input and output settings such as stimulus or response modality.

    “At the most peripheral level, these processes include task-specific input and output settings such as the modality of the stimulus inputs or the responses.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationnone given

    The backward span paradigm was predicted to generate high routine-mediated transfer.

    “This was itself predicted to generate high levels of routine-mediated transfer.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Learning is conceived as construction of new routines, and transfer is expected only for tasks that share routines.

    “This learning is conceived as the construction of new cognitive routines and transfer is only expected for tasks that might be expected to share routines.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationown data

    The findings were broadly consistent with the predictions.

    “The findings were broadly consistent with the predictions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    These gains are small and may be reliably detected only with higher statistical power than the standard WM training study.

    “These gains are small in magnitude and may be reliably detected only under conditions of higher statistical power than the standard WM training study.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The digit effect may reflect a recoding strategy or a confound in shared task features.

    “Although this may reflect a recoding strategy (or routine) developed during training (Chase & Ericsson, 1981), it could also be due to a confound in the shared features of the relevant task pairs.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Chase & Ericsson, 1981

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Modality changes require adjustment only to low-level input and output systems, not to higher-order task structures.

    “We had predicted that this would indeed be the case: changes in the sensory modality of either stimulus items or responses should require adjustment only to specialized input and output processing systems employed as low-level elements of routines, and shifting from one to another (from auditory to visual presentation, or spoken to manual responses) should not modify the higher-order structures of”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Generalization across other trainee populations will require further data.

    “However, generalization across other populations of trainees will require further data.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    If training increased fundamental efficiency, post-training performance should be best predicted by same-task pre-training scores; this was not the case.

    “If so, post-training performance should be best predicted by pre-training scores on the same task, as an index of the baseline capacity on which training experience could be built. This was not the case.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    In WM training there is little opportunity to develop higher-order routines applicable to other paradigms.

    “In WM training we believe there is little opportunity to develop sufficiently higher-order routines that can be applied to other paradigms.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    For already highly practiced activities, no new routine is needed, so there is little scope for improvement or transfer.

    “For activities that are already highly practiced before training commences, no new routine will be needed. There will therefore be little scope for either improvement on the trained activity or for transfer.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
126 of 126

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Training on unfamiliar working memory tasks leads to development of novel cognitive routines that control the sequence of cognitive processes required to perform the task.

    “First, training on unfamiliar WM tasks will lead to the development of novel cognitive routines that control the sequence of cognitive processes required to perform the task.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    These routines can be applied only to other tasks with common structures, and only then will transfer occur.

    “Second, these routines can be applied only to other tasks with common structures and only then will transfer occur.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Transfer following working memory training is restricted to cases where the training tasks require the establishment or refinement of a cognitive routine that is not already fully developed.

    “A core assumption is that transfer following WM training is restricted to cases where the training tasks require the establishment or refinement of a cognitive routine that is not already fully developed.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The contribution of rehearsal to verbal serial recall develops over the early school years and becomes fully functional by about seven years.

    “But most importantly for the present purposes, it is reasonable to assume that the contribution of rehearsal to verbal serial recall develops over the early school years and becomes fully functional by seven years or so.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Established processes involved in encoding verbal item and order information are not amenable to further training.

    “A key assumption of the framework is that established processes such as those involved in encoding verbal item and order information should not be amenable to further training.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The field lacks detailed accounts of the cognitive changes that take place during training.

    “the field lacks detailed accounts of the cognitive changes that take place.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    For most individuals, the recoding strategies require new routines that can transfer to other WM tasks with similar stimulus content.

    “We assume that for most individuals these strategies require the development of new routines that have the potential to transfer to other WM tasks with similar stimulus content.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Most WM training programs include complex WM tasks combining storage with additional processing demands.

    “Most training programs include complex WM tasks that combine the temporary storage demands of simple serial recall tasks with additional processing requirements such as changing the order of items at recall, updating the contents of WM, or handling irrelevant distraction.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    In all relevant training studies known to the authors, trained and untrained complex span tasks use different distractor activities.

    “Indeed, the distractor activities employed in the trained and untrained complex span tasks differ in all relevant training studies familiar to the authors.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Contemporary WM training programs usually involve multiple training activities with differing materials and fewer than 20 hours of training in total.

    “In contrast, contemporary training programs usually involve multiple training activities with differing materials and involved fewer than 20 h of training in total.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    In most complex span tasks, distractor activities are unrelated to the to-be-recalled items.

    “In most complex span tasks, the distractor activities are unrelated to the to-be-recalled stimulus items.2”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The studies combined in the meta-analysis are sufficiently comparable for a random-effects synthesis despite variation in training programs, samples, and outcome measures.

    “Due to variation in studies (e.g. type of training program used, age of sample, outcome measures used) a random effects model was chosen for all analyses.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The coding of task features used in the meta-analysis validly captures the cognitive demands relevant to transfer.

    “One limitation of the coding method is that although individual features are coded and analyzed independently of one another, matched features are often highly or indeed perfectly correlated with one another.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The active control conditions in the included studies adequately control for nonspecific training effects.

    “RCTs of adaptive WM training with active control training conditions.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Cognitive routines are hierarchically organized into subroutines that control the execution of processes for different task components.

    “Our starting position was that routines are hierarchically organized, consisting of subroutines that control the execution of processes necessary to accomplish different task components (e.g., encoding, maintenance, distractor processing, retrieval).”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    New routines are needed only when existing processes and mechanisms cannot satisfy the demands of the task.

    “These are only needed when existing processes and mechanisms are not sufficient to satisfy the demands of the task.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Performance IQ indexes the fluid cognitive abilities or general attentional resources relevant to constructing new routines.

    “Higher performance IQ scores were uniquely associated with the magnitude of transfer to the three WM tests (visuo-spatial serial recall, visuo-spatial complex span and backward span) hypothesized to require new routines.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The four WM training studies' samples can be combined for individual differences analysis.

    “To achieve the statistical power and heterogeneity required to examine individual differences in transfer following training, we re-analyzed data from four WM training studies in which measures of IQ as well as WM were obtained before and after training.”
18 of 18

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?

  • Evidence on stimulus domain and transfer is unclear/competing.

    “Some scholars argue that the novelty of visuospatial materials facilitates new learning and transfer (Gathercole et al., 2019; Norris et al., 2019), whereas competing evidence suggests stronger transfer following verbal WM training (Ni et al., 2023)”

    From The asymmetry of working memory training transfer: A systematic review and meta-analysis (2026) · cites this paper as Gathercole et al., 2019

    In Study 1, the paper proposes that training on spatial serial-recall tasks can develop new cognitive routines and produce robust transfer because an established visuospatial short-term-memory system may be absent. It does not attribute that effect to the novelty of visuospatial materials generally; its prediction concerns particular recall tasks, and the Study 1 Discussion says transfer across other kinds of visuospatial stimuli could not be tested. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Visual novelty can facilitate within-paradigm transfer, but paradigm-specific benefits associated with visual novelty may not support or even hinder cross-paradigm generalization.

    “Notably, this pattern differs from evidence that visual novelty can facilitate within-paradigm transfer (Gathercole et al., 2019; Norris et al., 2019), perhaps because the paradigm-specific benefits associated with visual novelty may not support or even hinder cross-paradigm generalization.”

    From The asymmetry of working memory training transfer: A systematic review and meta-analysis (2026) · cites this paper as Gathercole et al., 2019

    The General discussion (page unavailable) reports transfer when trained and untrained tasks share a paradigm, including visuo-spatial serial recall. It does not identify visual novelty as the factor facilitating that transfer. The suggestion about cross-paradigm generalization is framed as the citing authors’ own explanation, rather than a finding attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Small near-transfer effects can be accounted for by assuming that participants learn how to carry out a particular class of memory tasks rather than enhance their memory capacity.

    “Rather, such small effects can be easily accounted for by assuming that participants learn how to carry out a particular class of memory tasks rather than enhance their memory capacity (Gathercole et al., 2019;Melby-Lervåg et al., 2016;Sala & Gobet, 2019;Shipstead, Redick, & Engle, 2012).”

    From Working memory training does not enhance older adults' cognitive skills: A comprehensive meta-analysis (2019) · cites this paper as Gathercole et al., 2019

    The General discussion (page unavailable) attributes substantial transfer between similar tasks to learning new cognitive routines, rather than an increase in general memory capacity. But The cognitive routine framework distinguishes small transfer effects from this account: it suggests they may arise from fine-tuning established processes, while routine-mediated learning explains moderate to large effects. The citation therefore supports the task-learning explanation, but not its application to small effects generally. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Training on unfamiliar or highly demanding tasks, such as learning to play an instrument, leads to the development of new complex cognitive skills.

    “The cognitive routine framework (Gathercole et al., 2019) posits that training on unfamiliar or highly demanding tasks, such as learning to play an instrument, leads to the development of new complex cognitive skills.”

    From Please don't stop the music: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and academic benefits of instrumental musical training in childhood and adolescence (2022) · cites this paper as Gathercole et al., 2019

    In “The cognitive routine framework” (page unavailable), the paper proposes that training on unfamiliar working-memory tasks develops new cognitive routines; “Cognitive training as skill acquisition” describes these as complex cognitive skills. The framework is specifically about working-memory training, and the passages do not establish that it applies to learning to play an instrument. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Three included studies had healthy and clinical samples (Gathercole et al. 2019; Cásedas et al. 2020; Vermeir et al. 2020).

    “Three studies included healthy and clinical samples (Gathercole et al. 2019; Cásedas et al. 2020; Vermeir et al. 2020).”

    From Examining Working Memory Training for Healthy Adults—A Second-Order Meta-Analysis (2024) · cites this paper as Gathercole et al. 2019

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Effect sizes below .5 are labeled large

    Minor

    The auditory and visual matched effect sizes are called large, although the paper's stated convention places the moderate benchmark at .5 and the large benchmark at .8.

  • Cross-modal response data are both reported and denied

    Minor

    The manual-response results report a task pair with spoken recall at transfer and manual recall during training, then state that no cross-modal task-pair data are available.

  • Study 1 reports both 20 and 24 studies

    Minor

    The participant breakdown accounts for 20 studies (11 plus nine), but the discussion says the meta-analysis included 24 studies.

3 of 3

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

22 of the 208 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Chase, 1981, Skilled memory, Cognitive Skills and their Acquisition, 141

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Gathercole, S. E., Dunning, D. L., Holmes, J., & Norris, D.
Affiliations
MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit (GB)
Corresponding author
Gathercole, Susan E.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Memory and Language
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-04
Volume
105
Pages
19-42
ISSN
0749-596X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jml.2018.10.003
PMC
PMC6591133
OpenAlex
W2902394180
Semantic Scholar
4f0858b4d100dd2fffebd2b8f2232c34d70dd12c
Cited by
225
References
208
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 1
FWCI
27.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2019-06-01)
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Memory and Language (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (104908/Z/14/Z, 107496)
  • Leverhulme Trust (F00/224/AI)
  • Medical Research Council
  • Economic and Social Research Council (RES-000-23-0979, RES-000-)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
working memory training, transfer of training, skill acquisition, serial recall, complex span, short-term memory, fluid intelligence, children

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-08.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-08.

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