Cited by 366Cognitive Abilities and TestingReading and Literacy DevelopmentDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

Working memory training improves reading processes in typically developing children.

Loosli, Sandra V., Buschkuehl, Martin, Perrig, Walter J., Jaeggi, Susanne M.·2012·Child Neuropsychology

Abstract

The goal of this study was to investigate whether a brief cognitive training intervention results in a specific performance increase in the trained task, and whether there are transfer effects to other nontrained measures. A computerized, adaptive working memory intervention was conducted with 9- to 11-year-old typically developing children. The children considerably improved their performance in the trained working memory task. Additionally, compared to a matched control group, the experimental group significantly enhanced their reading performance after training, providing further evidence for shared processes between working memory and reading.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09297049.2011.575772

Cites

87 of 87 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • After 10-14 sessions of Braintwister working memory training, two studies consistently showed improvements on standardized tests of reading in students between 7 and 11 years of age.

    “After 10–14 sessions of training, both studies consistently showed improvements on standardized tests of reading in students between 7 and 11 years of age (Loosli et al., 2012; Karbach et al., 2014).”

    From Executive control training from middle childhood to adolescence (2014) · cites this paper as Loosli et al., 2012

  • Training effects can go beyond the trained domain and show benefits in measures considerably different from the training task if they are associated with the trained process and share comparable neural circuits (far transfer).

    “Furthermore, training effects could go beyond the trained domain and show benefits in measures considerably different from the training task, as long as they were associated with the trained process and shared comparable neural circuits (far transfer) (Jaeggi et al., 2008; Borella et al., 2010; Loosli et al., 2012; Dahlin, 2013).”

    From Training on Working Memory and Inhibitory Control in Young Adults (2016) · cites this paper as Loosli et al., 2012

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Loosli, S. V., Buschkuehl, M., Perrig, W. J., & Jaeggi, S. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Bern (CH)
  • University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Jaeggi, Susanne M.
Venue
Child Neuropsychology
Published
2011-05-26
Volume
18
Issue
1
Pages
62-78
ISSN
  • 0929-7049 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-4136
OpenAlex
W2128397957
Cited by
365
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 57 · 2019: 53 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 10
FWCI
22.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Child Neuropsychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Bern Open Repository and Information System (University of Bern) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
Keywords
working memory training, cognitive training, reading achievement, typically developing children, transfer effects
MeSH terms
Child, Child Development, Cognition, Educational Status, Female, Humans, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Reading, Transfer, Psychology

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