Cited by 122Cognitive Abilities and TestingNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesCognitive Functions and Memory

Practice effects in the brain: Changes in cerebral activation after working memory practice depend on task demands

Open access
Jolles, Dietsje D., Grol, Meike J., Van Buchem, Mark A., Rombouts, Serge A.R.B., Crone, Eveline A.·2010·NeuroImage

Abstract

Several studies have examined the neural effects of working memory practice, but due to different task demands, diverse patterns of neural changes have been reported. In the present study, we examined neural effects of practice using a task with different working memory demands within a single practice paradigm. Fifteen adults practiced during 6weeks with a task that required maintenance and manipulation of information under low and high working memory loads. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI) data were acquired in the first week and last week of the practice period. Results were compared with results of a control group who did not practice the task. We demonstrated that practice was beneficial for both working memory maintenance and manipulation processes but that these processes were supported by different neural changes. While maintenance trials showed increased activation (i.e., less deactivation) in default-mode regions after practice, manipulation trials experienced increased activation in the striatum. Changes were also observed in left ventrolateral prefrontal cortex (VLPFC), bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and left superior parietal cortex (SPC). However, for bilateral DLPFC and left SPC, these changes were not specific to the practice group. These findings illustrate the importance of controlling for test-retest effects in training or intervention studies. Behavioral follow-up tests demonstrated that practice effects lasted over a 6-month period, but the absence of transfer effects indicated that the acquired skills were specific for the practiced working memory task.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.04.028

Cites

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?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 84 · Cited by 122

Authors
Jolles, D. D., Grol, M. J., Van Buchem, M. A., Rombouts, S. A. R. B., & Crone, E. A.
Affiliations
Leiden University (NL)
Corresponding author
Jolles, Dietsje D.
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-08-15
Volume
52
Issue
2
Pages
658-668
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2048922382
Cited by
122
References
84
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 10
FWCI
14.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Gratama Stichting
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
practice effects, working memory load, working memory maintenance, default mode network, striatum, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, superior parietal cortex, test-retest effects, transfer effects
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain, Brain Mapping, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Neural Pathways, Neuropsychological Tests, Practice, Psychological, Reaction Time, Speech, Time Factors, Transfer, Psychology, Case-Control Studies, Young Adult

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