Working Memory and Reasoning Benefit from Different Modes of Large-scale Brain Dynamics in Healthy Older Adults
Published version of a preprint
Abstract
Researchers have proposed that solving complex reasoning problems, a key indicator of fluid intelligence, involves the same cognitive processes as solving working memory tasks. This proposal is supported by an overlap of the functional brain activations associated with the two types of tasks and by high correlations between interindividual differences in performance. We replicated these findings in 53 older participants but also showed that solving reasoning and working memory problems benefits from different configurations of the functional connectome and that this dissimilarity increases with a higher difficulty load. Specifically, superior performance in a typical working memory paradigm ( n-back) was associated with upregulation of modularity (increased between-network segregation), whereas performance in the reasoning task was associated with effective downregulation of modularity. We also showed that working memory training promotes task-invariant increases in modularity. Because superior reasoning performance is associated with downregulation of modular dynamics, training may thus have fostered an inefficient way of solving the reasoning tasks. This could help explain why working memory training does little to promote complex reasoning performance. The study concludes that complex reasoning abilities cannot be reduced to working memory and suggests the need to reconsider the feasibility of using working memory training interventions to attempt to achieve effects that transfer to broader cognition.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Neuroimaging findings indicate that working memory performance correlates with greater network segregation, while fluid intelligence tasks show the reverse pattern.
“Brain imaging data suggest that WM performance is associated with increased network segregation, whereas the opposite pattern occurs when participants are asked to solve fluid intelligence tasks (Lebedev, Nilsson, & Lövdén, 2018).”
From Working memory training in typically developing children: A multilevel meta-analysis (2020) · cites this paper as Lebedev, Nilsson, & Lövdén, 2018
The meta-analysis findings are in line with evidence that working memory and fluid intelligence differ in their underlying neural mechanisms.
“By contrast, our findings are in line with more recent evidence suggesting that WM and fluid intelligence differ from each other in terms of the underlying neural mechanisms (up-regulation and down-regulation of modularity; Lebedev, Nilsson, & Lövdén, 2018).”
From Working memory training does not enhance older adults' cognitive skills: A comprehensive meta-analysis (2019) · cites this paper as Lebedev, Nilsson, & Lövdén, 2018
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 76 · Cited by 21
- Authors
- Lebedev, A. V., Nilsson, J., & Lövdén, M.
- Affiliations
- Stockholm University (SE)
- Venue
- Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
- Publisher
- MIT Press
- Published
- 2018-07
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1033-1046
- ISSN
- 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
- 1530-8898
- OpenAlex
- W2791412468
- Cited by
- 21
- References
- 76
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 3.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- European Commission
- Vetenskapsrådet
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
- Keywords
- working memory, reasoning, fluid intelligence, functional connectome, network modularity, older adults, n-back task, working memory training, task difficulty, individual differences, brain dynamics
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Aging, Brain, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Intelligence, Learning, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Models, Neurological, Neuropsychological Tests, Oxygen, Problem Solving, Nonlinear Dynamics
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