The DOI matches its Crossref record; 164 of the 164 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Can impaired working memory functioning be improved by training? A meta-analysis with a special focus on brain injured patients.
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: Deficits in working memory (WM) are commonly observed after brain injuries and cause severe impairments in patients' everyday life. It is still under debate if training can enhance or rehabilitate WM in case of malfunction. The current meta-analysis investigates this issue from a clinical point of view. It addresses under which conditions and for which target group WM training may be justifiable. METHOD: Relevant WM training studies were identified by searching electronic literature databases with a comprehensive search term. In total, 103 studies, which added up to 112 independent group comparisons (N = 6,113 participants), were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Overall, WM training caused a moderate and long-lasting improvement in untrained WM tasks. Moreover, improvement of WM functioning led to sustainable better evaluation of everyday life functioning, however, effect sizes were small. Concerning transfer effects on other cognitive domains, long-lasting improvements with small effect sizes were observed in cognitive control and reasoning/intelligence. In contrast, small immediate, but no long-term effects were found for attention and long-term memory. Studies with brain injured patients demonstrated long-lasting improvements in WM functions with moderate to large effect sizes. A main moderator variable of intervention efficacy is the number of training sessions applied. CONCLUSION: WM training produces long-lasting beneficial effects which are strongly pronounced in patients with acquired brain injuries. This finding supports the application of WM training in clinical settings. To determine optimal training conditions, future studies must systematically investigate the characteristics of interventions as they are at present inevitably confounded.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.
Citations
Cites
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
Cohen, J. (1990) · Computers Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,417
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722
Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis
Higgins, J. P. T., & Thompson, S. G. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1186 · Cited by 36,763
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Cochrane Book Series
(2008) · doi:10.1002/9780470712184 · Cited by 25,048
Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions
Stroop, J. R. (1935) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0054651 · Cited by 18,622
Wasserman, S. S., Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1988) · Journal of Educational Statistics · doi:10.2307/1164953 · Cited by 10,377
A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysis
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2010) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.12 · Cited by 6,793
Individual differences in working memory and reading
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(80)90312-6 · Cited by 6,336
Working Memory Capacity as Executive Attention
Engle, R. W. (2002) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00160 · Cited by 2,507
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Ackerman, P. L., Beier, M. E., & Boyle, M. O. (2005). Working memory and intelligence: The same or different constructs? Psychological Bulletin, 131(1), 30–60. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033- · DOI
- Adam, K. C. S., Mance, I., Fukuda, K., & Vogel, E. K. (2015). The contribution of attentional lapses to individual differences in visual working memory capacity. Journal of Cognitive
- Neuroscience, 27(8), 1601–1616. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00811 · DOI
- Intelligence: Two Case Reports. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1939. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01939 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Melby-Lervåg, M., Redick, T. S., & Hulme, C. (2016) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691616635612 · Cited by 983
“For example, whether an active control group uses a nonadaptive training regime or a different, adaptive activity may have effects (Weicker et al., 2016).”
Wise interventions: Psychological remedies for social and personal problems.
Walton, G. M., & Wilson, T. D. (2018) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/rev0000115 · Cited by 617
Working memory training revisited: A multi-level meta-analysis of n-back training studies
Soveri, A., Antfolk, J., Karlsson, L., Salo, B., & Laine, M. (2017) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-016-1217-0 · Cited by 371
“…to cognitive control (Melby-Lervåg & Hulme, 2013; Weicker et al., 2016) and attention (Weicker et al., 2016), but no transfer to long-term memory (Weicker et al., 2016), arithmetic skills (Melby-Lervåg & Hulme, 2013; Ta bl e 1 Su m m ar y of th e re su lts fr om pr ev io us m et aan al ys es in…”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialWorking memory training involves learning new skills
Gathercole, S. E., Dunning, D. L., Holmes, J., & Norris, D. (2019) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2018.10.003 · Cited by 225
Working memory training in typically developing children: A meta-analysis of the available evidence.
Sala, G., & Gobet, F. (2017) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/dev0000265 · Cited by 216
Metadata
- Authors
- Weicker, J., Villringer, A., & Thöne-Otto, A.
- Affiliations
- Max Planck Society (DE)
- Leipzig University (DE)
- Venue
- Neuropsychology
- Published
- 2016
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 190-212
- ISSN
- 0894-4105 (ISSN-L)
- 1931-1559
- OpenAlex
- W1618038909
- Semantic Scholar
- 1016f832cb994fa36bd96a515015eb5bacbd71e9
- Cited by
- 147
- References
- 164
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 9
- FWCI
- 25.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- ul.qucosa.de
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- Locations
- Neuropsychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
- Qucosa (Saxon State and University Library Dresden) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Funders
- German Max Planck Society
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Keywords
- working memory training, working memory, brain injury, acquired brain injury, cognitive rehabilitation, transfer effects, cognitive control, attention, long-term memory, training sessions
- MeSH terms
- Attention, Brain Injuries, Humans, Intelligence, Learning, Memory, Short-Term, Thinking, Memory, Long-Term
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.
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
