CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 209Cognitive Abilities and TestingCognitive Functions and MemoryNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 62 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Failure of Working Memory Training to Enhance Cognition or Intelligence

Open access
Thompson, Todd W., Waskom, Michael L., Garel, Keri-Lee A., Cardenas-Iniguez, Carlos, Reynolds, Gretchen O., Winter, Rebecca, Chang, Patricia, Pollard, Kiersten, Lala, Nupur, Alvarez, George A., Gabrieli, John D. E.·2013·PLoS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0063614PMC PMC3661602
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Fluid intelligence is important for successful functioning in the modern world, but much evidence suggests that fluid intelligence is largely immutable after childhood. Recently, however, researchers have reported gains in fluid intelligence after multiple sessions of adaptive working memory training in adults. The current study attempted to replicate and expand those results by administering a broad assessment of cognitive abilities and personality traits to young adults who underwent 20 sessions of an adaptive dual n-back working memory training program and comparing their post-training performance on those tests to a matched set of young adults who underwent 20 sessions of an adaptive attentional tracking program. Pre- and post-training measurements of fluid intelligence, standardized intelligence tests, speed of processing, reading skills, and other tests of working memory were assessed. Both training groups exhibited substantial and specific improvements on the trained tasks that persisted for at least 6 months post-training, but no transfer of improvement was observed to any of the non-trained measurements when compared to a third untrained group serving as a passive control. These findings fail to support the idea that adaptive working memory training in healthy young adults enhances working memory capacity in non-trained tasks, fluid intelligence, or other measures of cognitive abilities.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0063614

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Performance across training sessions. A) Mean dual n-back load and B) mean multiple object tracking speeds achieved per session of training are displayed. Shaded area represents standard error of the mean.
Figure 1 Performance across training sessions. A) Mean dual n-back load and B) mean multiple object tracking speeds achieved per session of training are displayed. Shaded area represents standard error of the mean.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Duration of training effects. A) Difference between dual 6-back d' and dual 2-back d’ is shown for pre-training, post-training, and six-month follow-up sessions for both active training groups. B) Multiple object tracking speed is shown at all three time points for both active training groups. Solid dark, horizontal line indicates condition median; filled areas encode middle 50%. Whiskers extend 1.5 times the interquartile range beyond the box bounds.
Figure 2 Duration of training effects. A) Difference between dual 6-back d' and dual 2-back d’ is shown for pre-training, post-training, and six-month follow-up sessions for both active training groups. B) Multiple object tracking speed is shown at all three time points for both active training groups. Solid dark, horizontal line indicates condition median; filled areas encode middle 50%. Whiskers extend 1.5 times the interquartile range beyond the box bounds.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 64 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Raven JC, Court JH, Raven J (1998) Raven’s Progressive Matrices. Oxford: Oxford Psychological Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Thompson, T. W., Waskom, M. L., Garel, K.-L. A., Cardenas-Iniguez, C., Reynolds, G. O., Winter, R., Chang, P., Pollard, K., Lala, N., Alvarez, G. A., & Gabrieli, J. D. E.
Affiliations
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • Boston University (US)
  • The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • McGovern Institute for Brain Research (US)
Corresponding author
Thompson, Todd W.
ORCID
Venue
PLoS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2013-05-22
Volume
8
Issue
5
Pages
e63614
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0063614
PMC
PMC3661602
OpenAlex
W2054335768
Cited by
208
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 7
FWCI
34.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Knowledge@UChicago (University of Chicago) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • University of Chicago (cc-by)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Defense
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (NBCHC070105)
  • Advanced Research Projects Agency
  • National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (T90DA022759, R90DA023427)
  • NIH Blueprint for Neuroscience Research (R90DA023427, T90DA022759/R90DA023427, T90DA022759)
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, fluid intelligence, adaptive training, transfer of training, cognitive enhancement, processing speed, reading skills, attentional tracking, young adults, intelligence
MeSH terms
Adult, Cognition, Education, Female, Humans, Intelligence, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Reading, Young Adult

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