CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 981Cognitive Abilities and TestingNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesCognitive Functions and Memory

The concurrent validity of the N -back task as a working memory measure

Jaeggi, Susanne M., Buschkuehl, Martin, Perrig, Walter J., Meier, Beat·2010·Memory
DOI 10.1080/09658211003702171
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The N-back task is used extensively in literature as a working memory (WM) paradigm and it is increasingly used as a measure of individual differences. However, not much is known about the psychometric properties of this task and the current study aims to shed more light on this issue. We first review the current literature on the psychometric properties of the N-back task. With three experiments using task variants with different stimuli and load levels, we then investigate the nature of the N-back task by investigating its relationship to WM, and its role as an inter-individual difference measure. Consistent with previous literature, our data suggest that the N-back task is not a useful measure of individual differences in WM, partly because of its insufficient reliability. Nevertheless, the task seems to be useful for experimental research in WM and also well predicts inter-individual differences in other higher cognitive functions, such as fluid intelligence, especially when used at higher levels of load.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09658211003702171

Cites

80 of 80 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?

  • N-back is an updating task that shows a substantial correlation with higher-level cognitive measures, including Matrix Reasoning.

    “One of the most common tasks used in these WM training studies is the N-back, an updating task that correlates significantly with measures of higher-level cognition, such as Matrix Reasoning20–24.”

    From Near transfer to an unrelated N-back task mediates the effect of N-back working memory training on matrix reasoning (2022) · cites this paper as [24]

  • Transfer to untrained n-back tasks following n-back training holds true when the stimulus items are either from the same or a different domain to the trained items.

    “This holds true when the stimulus items are either from both the same (e.g., letters to digits) or different domain (e.g., spatial locations to digits) to the trained items (Li et al., 2008; Jaeggi et al., 2010; Anguera et al., 2012; Bürki et al., 2014; Waris et al., 2015; Küper and Karbach, 2016; Minear et al., 2016; Blacker et al., 2017).”

    From Are Working Memory Training Effects Paradigm-Specific? (2019) · cites this paper as Jaeggi et al., 2010

  • There was evidence suggesting n-back training transfers to n-back tasks with new stimulus materials.

    “In line with previous findings, there was evidence suggesting n-back training transfers to n-back tasks with new stimulus materials (Jaeggi et al., 2010; Anguera et al., 2012; Küper and Karbach, 2016; Minear et al., 2016; Soveri et al., 2017).”

    From Are Working Memory Training Effects Paradigm-Specific? (2019) · cites this paper as Jaeggi et al., 2010

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Jaeggi, S. M., Buschkuehl, M., Perrig, W. J., & Meier, B.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • University of Bern (CH)
Corresponding author
Jaeggi, Susanne M.
ORCID
Venue
Memory
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2010-04-19
Volume
18
Issue
4
Pages
394-412
ISSN
  • 0965-8211 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-0686
DOI
10.1080/09658211003702171
OpenAlex
W2104281515
Semantic Scholar
1cdd5a855d4ded37954d52981b618cd9a6576f96
Cited by
981
References
77
Citations by year
2026: 85 · 2025: 92 · 2024: 112 · 2023: 70 · 2022: 85 · 2021: 78 · 2020: 57 · 2019: 79 · 2018: 62 · 2017: 55 · 2016: 48 · 2015: 50 · 2014: 39 · 2013: 26 · 2012: 24
FWCI
28.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Memory (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • BORIS (University Library Bern) (submittedVersion)
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
n-back task, working memory, concurrent validity, individual differences, reliability statistics, fluid intelligence, workload, psychometric properties
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Association Learning, Attention, Female, Humans, Individuality, Intelligence, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Neuropsychological Tests, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Psychometrics, Reaction Time, Reading, Retention, Psychology, Serial Learning, Speech Perception, Verbal Learning, Reproducibility of Results, Young Adult, 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