Cited by 1,101Cognitive Abilities and TestingCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skillsCognitive Functions and Memory

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Is working memory training effective?

Shipstead, Zach, Redick, Thomas S., Engle, Randall W.·2012·Psychological Bulletin

Abstract

Working memory (WM) is a cognitive system that strongly relates to a person's ability to reason with novel information and direct attention to goal-relevant information. Due to the central role that WM plays in general cognition, it has become the focus of a rapidly growing training literature that seeks to affect broad cognitive change through prolonged training on WM tasks. Recent work has suggested that the effects of WM training extend to general fluid intelligence, attentional control, and reductions in symptoms of ADHD. We present a theoretically motivated perspective of WM and subsequently review the WM training literature in light of several concerns. These include (a) the tendency for researchers to define change to abilities using single tasks, (b) inconsistent use of valid WM tasks, (c) no-contact control groups, and (d) subjective measurement of change. The literature review highlights several findings that warrant further research but ultimately concludes that there is a need to directly demonstrate that WM capacity increases in response to training. Specifically, we argue that transfer of training to WM must be demonstrated using a wider variety of tasks, thus eliminating the possibility that results can be explained by task specific learning. Additionally, we express concern that many of the most promising results (e.g., increased intelligence) cannot be readily attributed to changes in WM capacity. Thus, a critical goal for future research is to uncover the mechanisms that lead to transfer of training.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0027473

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 1,101

Metadata

Authors
Shipstead, Z., Redick, T. S., & Engle, R. W.
Affiliations
Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
Venue
Psychological Bulletin
Published
2012-07
Volume
138
Issue
4
Pages
628-654
ISSN
  • 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1455
OpenAlex
W2160648917
Cited by
1,101
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 52 · 2021: 65 · 2020: 118 · 2019: 74 · 2018: 90 · 2017: 110 · 2016: 109 · 2015: 125 · 2014: 110 · 2013: 73 · 2012: 27
FWCI
142.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Office of Naval Research (N00014-09-1-0129)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › 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, fluid intelligence, attentional control, ADHD symptoms, task-specific learning, working memory capacity, cognitive training
MeSH terms
Attention, Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity, Cognition, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Intelligence, Memory, Short-Term, Neuropsychological Tests, Practice, Psychological, Research Design, Transfer, Psychology, Program Evaluation, Treatment Outcome

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