Cited by 294Cognitive Abilities and TestingDevelopmental and Educational NeuropsychologyCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills

A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence on the near- and far-transfer effects among children’s executive function skills.

Open access
Kassai, Reka, Futo, Judit, Demetrovics, Zsolt, Takacs, Zsofia K.·2019·Psychological Bulletin

Abstract

In the present meta-analysis we examined the near- and far-transfer effects of training components of children's executive functions skills: working memory, inhibitory control, and cognitive flexibility. We found a significant near-transfer effect (g + = 0.44, k = 43, p + = 0.11, k = 17, p = .11). That is, training a component did not have a significant effect on the untrained components. By showing the absence of benefits that generalize beyond the trained components, we question the practical relevance of training specific executive function skills in isolation. Furthermore, the present results might explain the absence of far-transfer effects of working memory training on academic skills (Melby-Lervag & Hulme, 2013; Sala & Gobet, 2017). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/bul0000180

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • Interventions to improve EF have met with limited success.

    “While interventions to improve EF have met with limited success (Kassai et al., 2019; Melby-Lervåg & Hulme, 2013; Takacs & Kassai, 2019), interest in EF persists in large part because it is believed to be malleable and relevant to a wide range of important outcomes.”
  • The same null effect applies to action and nonaction videogame training and brain training.

    “The same applies to action and nonaction videogame training and brain training (Duyck & Op de Beeck, 2019; Kassai, Futo, Demetrovics, & Takacs, 2019; Libertus et al., 2017; Lintern & Boot, 2019; Sala et al., 2019a; Sala, Tatlidil, & Gobet, 2018, 2019b; Simons et al., 2016).”

    From Cognitive and academic benefits of music training with children: A multilevel meta-analysis (2020) · cites this paper as Kassai, Futo, Demetrovics, & Takacs, 2019

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kassai, R., Futo, J., Demetrovics, Z., & Takacs, Z. K.
Affiliations
Eötvös Loránd University (HU)
Venue
Psychological Bulletin
Published
2019-02
Volume
145
Issue
2
Pages
165-188
ISSN
  • 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1455
OpenAlex
W2910613434
Cited by
294
References
18
Citations by year
2026: 47 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 31 · 2019: 10
FWCI
4.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Hungarian National Research, Development and Innovation Office (PD121297)
  • Ministry of Human Capacities (UNKP-17-4-I-ELTE-125)
  • Hungarian Academy of Sciences
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
Keywords
executive function, near transfer, far transfer, working memory training, children, training specificity, generalization of training effects, academic skills
MeSH terms
Child, Humans, Memory, Short-Term, Practice, Psychological, Transfer, Psychology, Executive Function

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