CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 74Cognitive Abilities and TestingCognitive Functions and MemoryNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Dual N-back working memory training in healthy adults: A randomized comparison to processing speed training.

Open access
Lawlor-Savage, Linette, Goghari, Vina M.·2016·PLOS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0151817PMC PMC4820261
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Enhancing cognitive ability is an attractive concept, particularly for middle-aged adults interested in maintaining cognitive functioning and preventing age-related declines. Computerized working memory training has been investigated as a safe method of cognitive enhancement in younger and older adults, although few studies have considered the potential impact of working memory training on middle-aged adults. This study investigated dual n-back working memory training in healthy adults aged 30-60. Fifty-seven adults completed measures of working memory, processing speed, and fluid intelligence before and after a 5-week web-based dual n-back or active control (processing speed) training program. RESULTS: Repeated measures multivariate analysis of variance failed to identify improvements across the three cognitive composites, working memory, processing speed, and fluid intelligence, after training. Follow-up Bayesian analyses supported null findings for training effects for each individual composite. Findings suggest that dual n-back working memory training may not benefit working memory or fluid intelligence in healthy adults. Further investigation is necessary to clarify if other forms of working memory training may be beneficial, and what factors impact training-related benefits, should they occur, in this population.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In healthy adults aged 30–60, 5 weeks of web-based dual n-back working memory training did not improve working memory, processing speed, or fluid intelligence relative to active processing speed training. Bayesian analyses supported null training effects.

Key findings

  • The final analyzed sample was 57 adults (working memory group n = 27, processing speed group n = 30). Repeated measures MANOVA found no group × time difference across the three cognitive composites, F(3,52) = 0.37, p = .77, and no main effect of time, F(3,52) = 0.13, p = .94.
  • Bayesian analyses supported the null for training effects; for interaction effects, the data favored the null by 33.72:1 for working memory, 34.40:1 for processing speed, and 39.97:1 for fluid intelligence.
  • Both groups improved on their trained tasks: dual n-back mean level increased from 1.99 to 3.29, t(26) = 13.05, p < .001; processing speed total scores increased from 4,492.80 to 11,773.42, t(30) = 12.85, p < .001. Training dosage correlated with n-back improvement, r = .78, p < .001, but not with any cognitive outcome, r’s = −.12–.21, p’s = .28–.99.
  • The processing speed group trained more total hours (M = 7.54, SD = 1.77) than the working memory group (M = 6.52, SD = 0.93), t(55) = 2.67, p < .01; higher processing speed dosage was associated with lower Automated Operation Span scores, r = −.36, p = .04.

Methods

  • Randomized comparison of web-based Lumosity dual n-back working memory training versus active processing speed training in healthy adults aged 30–60 self-referred from a Canadian community. Of 81 consented, 61 completed baseline and post-training testing; the final analyzed sample was 57 after excluding low training dosage. Training was 20–30 minutes per day, 5 days per week, for 5 weeks.
  • Outcomes measured pre- and post-training: working memory (WAIS-IV Digit Span; Automated Operation Span), processing speed (WAIS-IV Symbol Search and Coding), and fluid intelligence (Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices; Cattell’s Culture Fair Test Scale 3). Baseline intelligence was estimated with the WASI-II. Cognitive composites were created from z-scores.
  • Main analysis used repeated measures MANOVA on the three cognitive composites entered simultaneously, followed by JZS Bayes factor ANOVAs with default prior scales.

Limitations

  • Stated: no no-contact control group was included; the processing speed group had a larger training dosage than the working memory group, which may have blunted between-group effects; the study was underpowered (power analysis required 139 participants for effect size 0.24, or 467 for effect size 0.13, but the sample was 57).
  • Stated: outcome measures may be suboptimal—Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices split forms may differ in difficulty, and Automated Operation Span may be too divergent from dual n-back processes; motivation and frustration were not extensively assessed; self-directed training meant other brain training could not be fully controlled.
  • Evident from the text: the sample was mostly Caucasian (88%), female (72%), coupled (75%), employed full-time (68%), post-secondary educated (89%), with incomes above $50,000 (74%), and self-referred, limiting generalizability.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0151817

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

0 of 109 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    Repeated measures multivariate analysis of variance failed to identify improvements across the three cognitive composites, working memory, processing speed, and fluid intelligence, after training.

    “Repeated measures multivariate analysis of variance failed to identify improvements across the three cognitive composites, working memory, processing speed, and fluid intelligence, after training.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The study had sufficient statistical power to detect training-related improvements if they existed.
  • Findingown data

    Statistically significant correlations were revealed for all measures within the working memory domain at baseline.

    “Statistically significant correlations were revealed for all measures within the working memory domain (r’s .33-.80, p’s < .001-.02).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Measures within the processing speed domain were significantly correlated at baseline.

    “measures within the processing speed domain were significantly correlated, r = .67, p < .001”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    At baseline, no significant differences emerged in any demographic variables or cognitive outcome measures between the working memory and processing speed groups.

    “At baseline, no significant differences emerged in any demographic variables or cognitive outcome measures between the working memory and processing speed groups.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Measures within the fluid intelligence domain were significantly correlated at baseline.

    “measures within the fluid intelligence domain were significantly correlated, r = .30, p = .007.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 63
  • May combine two claims. 40

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    There were no demographic or cognitive differences between study completers and non-completers.

    “There were no demographic or cognitive differences between study completers and non-completers.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Of the 81 participants who began the study, 57 completed all components.

    “Of the 81 participants who began the study, 57 completed all components of the study (pre- and post-testing and at least 13 of 25 training sessions).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In the processing speed group, the mean of total scores on the first day of training was 4,492.80 (SD = 2,626.76) and on the last day of training, 11,773.42 (SD = 1,992.28).

    “The mean of total scores on the first day of training was 4,492.80 (SD = 2,626.76) and on the last day of training, 11,773.42 (SD = 1,992.28).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    A significant difference emerged in total hours of training, t(55) = 2.67, p < .01, with the processing speed group training more total hours (M = 7.54, SD = 1.77) than the working memory group (M = 6.52, SD = 0.93).

    “a significant difference emerged in total hours of training, t(55) = 2.67, p < .01 with the processing speed group training more total hours (M = 7.54, SD = 1.77) than the working memory group (M = 6.52, SD = 0.93).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Within the working memory group, the mean average n-back level achieved on the first day of training was 1.99 (SD = 0.31) and on the last day of training, 3.29 (SD = 0.65).

    “Within the working memory group, the mean average n-back level achieved on the first day of training was 1.99 (SD = 0.31) and on the last day of training, 3.29 (SD = 0.65).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The two groups did not differ significantly in number of training sessions (working memory group M = 22.81, SD = 3.27; processing speed group M = 22.70, SD = 3.35, t(55) = 0.13, p = .90).

    “Although the two groups did not differ significantly in number of training sessions (working memory group M = 22.81, SD = 3.27; processing speed group M = 22.70, SD = 3.35, t(55) = 0.13, p = .90)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Working memory trainees spent an average of 17.16 minutes per daily training session, whereas processing speed trainees spent an average of 19.93 minutes per daily training session.

    “Working memory trainees spent an average of 17.16 minutes per daily training session, whereas processing speed trainees spent an average of 19.93 minutes per daily training session.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For the working memory composite, the data were 4.80:1 in favour of the alternative hypothesis, or 4.8 times more likely to occur under a model that excluded a main effect of time.

    “Specifically, for the working memory composite, the data were 4.80:1 in favour of the alternative hypothesis, or 4.8 times more likely to occur under a model that excluded a main effect of time.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Throughout training, over half the working memory group (52%) reached 4-back, and many reached 5-back (26%).

    “Throughout training, over half the group (52%) reached 4-back, and many reached 5-back (26%).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Two participants (7%) did not surpass 3-back and four participants (15%) reached 6-back in the working memory group.

    “Two participants (7%) did not surpass 3-back and four participants (15%) reached 6-back.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Participants were not aware that processing speed and working memory programs were being directly compared.

    “Participants were told only about their training program and were not aware that processing speed and working memory programs were being directly compared”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    All testing materials were scripted to ensure consistency of instructions.

    “All testing materials were scripted to ensure consistency of instructions to participants.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    To maintain experimenter blinding, post-testing was conducted by research assistants trained and supervised by the author.

    “To maintain experimenter blinding, post-testing was conducted by research assistants trained and supervised by the author (LLS).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The University of Calgary Conjoint Faculties Research Ethics Board approved this study, and all participants provided written informed consent.

    “The University of Calgary Conjoint Faculties Research Ethics Board approved this study, and all participants provided written informed consent.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    The CCFT is considered a superior and more specific measure of fluid intelligence compared to measures using only matrix tasks.

    “The CCFT is considered a superior and more specific measure of fluid intelligence compared to measures using only matrix tasks [45,46]”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [45] R Colom, 2003, Secular gains in fluid intelligence: Evidence from the culture-fair intelligence test, J Biosoc Sci source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [46] LJ Tranter, 2008, Age and flexible thinking: An experimental demonstration of the beneficial effects of increased cognitively stimulating activity on fluid intelligence in healthy older adults, Aging, Neuropsychology & Cognition source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Baseline tests were conducted by the author who was blind to randomization until training instructions were revealed.

    “Baseline tests were conducted by the author (LLS) who was blind to randomization until training instructions were revealed at the end of testing.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    To reduce carryover and fatigue effects, the administration order of cognitive tasks was counterbalanced.

    “To reduce carryover and fatigue effects, the administration order of cognitive tasks was counterbalanced [48].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [48] E Williams, 1949, Experimental designs balanced for the estimation of residual effects of treatments, Australian Journal of Chemistry source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The 36 RAPM test items were split into parallel odd and even forms counterbalanced across participants.

    “the 36 test items were split into parallel odd and even forms counterbalanced across participants with the opposite form delivered at post-test.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    The WASI-II has demonstrated convergent and structural validity with more lengthy measures of intelligence.

    “The WASI-II is an update to the original WASI, which has demonstrated convergent and structural validity with more lengthy measures of intelligence [39].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [39] GL Canivez, 2009, Construct validity of the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence and Wide Range Intelligence test: Convergent and structural validity, School Psychology Quarterly source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Game play data were monitored for compliance and reviewed daily to ensure participants were not playing non-assigned games.

    “Game play data were monitored for compliance and reviewed daily to ensure participants were not playing non-assigned games on the Lumosity platform.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Correlations were conducted among all baseline cognitive outcome measures to ensure the chosen measures within each cognitive domain were sufficiently related.

    “Correlations (two-tailed) were conducted among all baseline cognitive outcome measures to ensure the chosen measures within each cognitive domain were sufficiently related.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    The Processing Speed Index is a reliable measure of processing speed, and Symbol Search is considered one of the purest measures of processing speed.

    “Taken together, the Processing Speed Index is a reliable measure of processing speed, and individually, Symbol Search is considered one of the purest measures of processing speed [41].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [41] D Wechsler, 2008, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—fourth edition: Canadian manual

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Non-compliant participants were removed from data analysis.

    “non-compliant participants were removed from data analysis.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Participants were asked not to discuss their training program with research assistants, and assistants did not know specifics of the games or target skills.

    “Participants were asked not to discuss their training program with the research assistants, and assistants did not know specifics of the games or the target skills being trained (e.g., speed versus working memory).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The study was unable to control for potential contamination from other forms of brain training during the study period.

    “Although participants were asked to not engage in other forms of “brain training” during the study period, we were unable to control for such potential contamination.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    CCFT forms A and B were administered counterbalanced across participants.

    “For the CCFT, forms A and B were also administered counterbalanced across participants.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Effect sizes between active and passive control groups did not significantly differ; however, studies with active control groups demonstrated less differential effect on fluid intelligence than those with passive control groups.

    “Effect sizes between active and passive control groups did not significantly differ; however, studies with active control groups demonstrated less differential effect on fluid intelligence than those with passive control groups.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [14] J Au, 2014, Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis, Psychon Bull Rev

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Other studies demonstrated improvement in near-transfer tasks although no improvement in far transfer.

    “Other studies demonstrated improvement in near-transfer tasks although no improvement in far transfer [6,8,10,12,15].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 5 sources checked
    • cites [6] R Colom, 2013, Adaptive n-back training does not improve fluid intelligence at the construct level: Gains on individual tests suggest that training may enhance visuospatial processing, Intelligence source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [8] L Lilienthal, 2013, Dual n-back training increases the capacity of the focus of attention, Psychon Bull Rev source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [10] T Salminen, 2012, On the impacts of working memory training on executive functioning, Front Hum Neurosci source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [12] Seidler RD, Bernard JA, Buschkuehl M, Jaeggi S, Jonides J, Humfleet J. Cognitive Training as an Intervention to Improve Driving Ability in the Older Adult; Technical Report M-CASTL 2010–01. University of Michigan: Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 2010. Available: <ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-328X/4/3/301/htm#sthash.GO0N1adF.dpuf" xlink:type="simple">http://www.mdpi.com/2076-328X/4/3/301/htm#sthash.GO0N1adF.dpuf</ext-link>

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [15] SM Jaeggi, 2011, Short- and long-term benefits of cognitive training, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The mismatch model of cognitive plasticity suggests that increasing demand on cognitive processes leads to expansion of resources associated with cognitive functioning.

    “The mismatch model of cognitive plasticity suggests that increasing the demand on cognitive processes leads to expansion of resources associated with cognitive functioning [22].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [22] M Lövdén, 2010, A theoretical framework for the study of adult cognitive plasticity, Psychol Bull source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Based on the mismatch model, the ceiling of one's cognitive abilities can be progressively pushed upward by continually challenging the upper limits of those abilities.

    “Based on this model, the ceiling of one’s cognitive abilities can be progressively pushed upward by continually challenging the upper limits of those abilities.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    In some cases, statistically significant differences were due to post-intervention decreases in control group performance rather than enhancements in the n-back training group.

    “Redick [23] pointed out that in some cases, statistically significant differences were due not to post-intervention enhancements in the n-back training group, but rather, to post-intervention decreases in control group performance.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [23] TS Redick, 2015, Working memory training and interpreting interactions in intelligence interventions, Intelligence source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Healthy, middle-aged adults are particularly interested in improving their existing intellectual abilities and potentially staving off age-related cognitive decline.

    “Healthy, middle-aged adults are particularly interested in improving their existing intellectual abilities and potentially staving off age-related cognitive decline [2].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [2] A Fernandez, 2011, The business and ethics of the brain fitness boom, Generations

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Working memory and fluid intelligence are each independently key aspects of overall intelligence.

    “working memory and fluid intelligence are each, independently, key aspects of overall intelligence [3]”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [3] ARA Conway, 2003, Trends Cogn Sci, Trends Cogn Sci

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Dougherty and colleagues' Bayesian analysis of Au and colleagues' data supported the null hypothesis of no training effect relative to active-control groups, although acknowledged training effects when passive controls were utilized.

    “Dougherty and colleagues [27] conducted a Bayesian analysis of Au and colleagues’ data, which supported the null hypothesis of no training effect relative to active-control groups, although acknowledged training effects when passive controls were utilized.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [27] MR Dougherty, 2015, Reevaluating the effectiveness of n-back training on transfer though the Bayesian lens: Support for the null, Psychon. Bull. Rev

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisenone given

    Little is known about whether working memory training induces cognitive plasticity in middle-aged adults.

    “little is known about whether working memory training induces cognitive plasticity in this population.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Healthy adults in dual n-back working memory training studies are consistently of a restricted age range (mean age low to mid 20s) and often with university affiliation.

    “healthy adults in dual n-back working memory training studies are consistently of a restricted age range (i.e., mean participant age low to mid 20’s) and often with university affiliation (e.g., psychology undergraduates).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Working memory and fluid intelligence are highly related, yet distinct.

    “The theoretical basis for why working memory training might enhance fluid intelligence lies in findings that working memory and fluid intelligence are highly related, yet distinct [3].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [3] ARA Conway, 2003, Trends Cogn Sci, Trends Cogn Sci

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Should working memory training groups differ from active control training groups, the benefits of working memory training can be considered more specific to working memory training.

    “However, should working memory training groups differ from active control training groups, the benefits of working memory training can be considered more specific to working memory training.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    Cognitive composites were created and analyzed given moderate correlations between outcome measures within each cognitive domain.

    “Given moderate correlations between outcome measures within each cognitive domain, cognitive composites were created and analyzed.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Overall intelligence is consistently associated with academic, social, and vocational success.

    “which is consistently associated with academic, social, and vocational success [20,21].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [20] LS Gottfredson, 1997, Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life, Intelligence source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [21] L Gottfredson, 2009, Intelligence: Foundations and issues in assessment, Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A survey of processing speed training studies conducted from 2002-2011 largely indicated that processing speed training transferred to improvements on tasks directly associated with the training task, but did not generally transfer to other tasks.

    “a survey of processing speed training studies conducted from 2002–2011 largely indicated that processing speed training transferred to improvements on tasks directly associated with the training task, but did not generally transfer to other tasks [35].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [35] H Takeuchi, 2012, Effects of processing speed training on cognitive functions and neural systems, Reviews in the Neurosciences source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Amount of financial compensation provided to trainees had a negative effect on training related outcomes.

    “Finally, amount of financial compensation provided to trainees had a negative effect on training related outcomes [14].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [14] J Au, 2014, Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis, Psychon Bull Rev

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Reported findings on dual n-back training are generally inconsistent and at times questionable.

    “However, reported findings are generally inconsistent, and at times, questionable.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Adaptive dual n-back working memory tasks align well with the mismatch model.

    “Adaptive dual n-back working memory tasks align well with this model.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Sample sizes in dual n-back training studies tend to be small (often less than 20 per group), and control groups vary among studies.

    “sample sizes tend to be small (i.e., often less than 20 per group), and control groups vary among studies (e.g., active versus passive controls, diversity among active control groups).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Dual n-back working memory training has been associated with improvement on similar dual n-back tasks, other tasks of working memory, and fluid intelligence.

    “Dual n-back working memory training has been associated with improvement on similar dual n-back tasks, other tasks of working memory, and the broader construct of fluid intelligence [5–18]”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 10 sources checked
    • cites [5] SM Jaeggi, 2008, Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [6] R Colom, 2013, Adaptive n-back training does not improve fluid intelligence at the construct level: Gains on individual tests suggest that training may enhance visuospatial processing, Intelligence source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [7] B Kundu, 2013, Strengthened effective connectivity underlies transfer of working memory training to tests of short-term memory and attention, J Neurosci source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [8] L Lilienthal, 2013, Dual n-back training increases the capacity of the focus of attention, Psychon Bull Rev source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [9] SR Rudebeck, 2012, A Potential Spatial Working Memory Training Task to Improve Both Episodic Memory and Fluid Intelligence, PLoS One source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [10] T Salminen, 2012, On the impacts of working memory training on executive functioning, Front Hum Neurosci source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [11] S Schweizer, 2011, Extending brain-training to the affective domain: Increasing cognitive and affective executive control through emotional working memory training, Plos One source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [12] Seidler RD, Bernard JA, Buschkuehl M, Jaeggi S, Jonides J, Humfleet J. Cognitive Training as an Intervention to Improve Driving Ability in the Older Adult; Technical Report M-CASTL 2010–01. University of Michigan: Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 2010. Available: <ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-328X/4/3/301/htm#sthash.GO0N1adF.dpuf" xlink:type="simple">http://www.mdpi.com/2076-328X/4/3/301/htm#sthash.GO0N1adF.dpuf</ext-link>

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [13] H Stepankova, 2014, The malleability of working memory and visuospatial skills: a randomized controlled study in older adults, Dev Psychol source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [14] J Au, 2014, Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis, Psychon Bull Rev

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Middle aged adults are less adept at dual n-back tasks than younger adults (aged 19-28), presumably related to the higher memory load required by the dual n-back relative to single n-back tasks.

    “Jaeggi and colleagues [31] demonstrated that middle aged adults are less adept at dual n-back tasks than younger adults (aged 19–28), presumably related to the higher memory load required by the dual n-back, relative to single n-back, tasks.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [31] SM Jaeggi, 2009, Differential age effects in load-dependent memory processing, Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Training setting did not influence training effect size; studies conducted outside the United States yielded significantly larger effect sizes than local studies.

    “Training setting did not influence training effect size; although, studies conducted outside of the United States yielded significantly larger effect sizes than local studies [14].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [14] J Au, 2014, Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis, Psychon Bull Rev

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted).

    Premisecitation

    Some have suggested that Automated Operation Span relies on recall processes whereas n-back recruits recognition abilities.

    “For example, some have suggested that Automated Operation Span relies on recall processes whereas n-back recruits recognition abilities [17].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [17] SM Jaeggi, 2010, The relationship between n-back performance and matrix reasoning—implications for training and transfer, Intelligence source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    We compared mean scores of the two RAPM forms at baseline and no significant differences were detected between form A and B, suggesting difficulty of the two forms was similar.

    “Although not as precise as an Item Response Theory analysis, we compared mean scores of the two forms at baseline and no significant differences were detected between form A and B, suggesting difficulty of the two forms was similar.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    The Automated Operation Span task used in this study may be too divergent from the processes trained by dual n-back.

    “Furthermore, the Automated Operation Span task used in this study may be too divergent from the processes trained by dual n-back.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Redick and Lindsey suggested that improving the processes involved in n-back task performance via repeated practice does not result in changes to the processes involved in complex span performance.

    “More recently, Redick and Lindsey [56] suggested that “improving the processes involved in n-back task performance via repeated practice does not result in changes to the processes involved in complex span performance.””
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [56] TS Redick, 2013, Complex span and n-back measures of working memory: a meta-analysis, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    The speed games recruited immediate visual memory but did not require maintenance or manipulation (updating) of information in working memory.

    “Although the speed games recruited immediate visual memory, they did not require maintenance or manipulation (i.e., updating) of information in working memory.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    As noted in the mismatch model of cognitive plasticity, if a training task is too difficult, the trainee may become overwhelmed and give up.

    “As noted in the mismatch model of cognitive plasticity, if a training task is too difficult, the trainee may become overwhelmed and give up [22].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [22] M Lövdén, 2010, A theoretical framework for the study of adult cognitive plasticity, Psychol Bull source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Utilization of non-assigned games was monitored and contamination was minimal (e.g., 9 of 27 n-back trainees played an average of 6.34 minutes of unassigned games in addition to their n-back training program).

    “Utilization of non-assigned games was monitored and contamination was minimal (e.g., 9 of 27 n-back trainees played an average of 6.34 minutes of unassigned games in addition to their n-back training program).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Although Au and colleagues concluded positive effects of dual n-back training on working memory and fluid intelligence, a Bayesian approach suggested the data fit better with the null hypothesis.

    “Furthermore, although Au and colleagues [14] concluded positive effects of dual n-back training on working memory and fluid intelligence, a Bayesian approach suggested the data fit better with the null hypothesis [27].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [14] J Au, 2014, Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis, Psychon Bull Rev

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [27] MR Dougherty, 2015, Reevaluating the effectiveness of n-back training on transfer though the Bayesian lens: Support for the null, Psychon. Bull. Rev

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Previous data indicate notable correlations between n-back tasks and complex span tasks.

    “This is despite previous data indicating notable correlations between n-back tasks and complex span tasks [57,58].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [57] GC Burgess, 2011, Neural mechanisms of interference control underlie the relationship between fluid intelligence and working memory span, Journal of Experimental Psychology. General source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [58] F Schmiede, 2009, Complex span versus updating tasks of working memory: The gap is not that deep, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    In this study, we counterbalanced the administration order such that 50% of participants received form A at baseline, and 50% received form B.

    “In this study, we counterbalanced the administration order such that 50% of participants received form A at baseline, and 50% received form B.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Digit Span Forward is considered a measure of auditory attention span whereas Digit Span Backward and Sequencing recruit the additional working memory component of manipulation.

    “Digit Span Forward is considered a measure of auditory attention span whereas Digit Span Backward and Sequencing recruit the additional working memory component of manipulation (i.e., mentally re-arranging digits).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In the ACTIVE study, as with ours, processing speed training resulted in improved performance on the trained task although enhancements did not transfer to broader measures of processing speed.

    “In the ACTIVE study, as with ours, processing speed training resulted in improved performance on the trained task although enhancements did not transfer to broader measures of processing speed [35].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [35] H Takeuchi, 2012, Effects of processing speed training on cognitive functions and neural systems, Reviews in the Neurosciences source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Jaeggi and colleagues conducted an Item Response Theory analysis of the RAPM and concluded that when split into parallel odd and even forms, one form is disproportionately more difficult than the other form, which can distort results by making it appear that one group performed better, or worse, than another group.

    “For example, Jaeggi and colleagues [16] conducted an Item Response Theory analysis of the RAPM and concluded that when split into parallel odd and even forms, one form is disproportionately more difficult than the other form, which can distort results by making it appear that one group performed better, or worse, than another group.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [16] SM Jaeggi, 2014, The role of individual differences in cognitive training and transfer, Mem. Cognit source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationown data

    The finding that higher processing speed training dosages were associated with poorer Automated Operation Span performance can only be interpreted with caution given that main effects of time were likely not due to training.

    “However, this finding can only be interpreted with caution given that main effects of time were likely not due to training.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    Conversely, if a training task is too easy, the trainee may lose interest.

    “Conversely, if a training task is too easy, the trainee may lose interest.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    Our study, and others, remain susceptible to criticism based on the measures chosen to detect change.

    “Our study, and others (e.g., [5,10,17,25]), remain susceptible to criticism based on the measures chosen to detect change.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Although no cognitive task is pure, there are processing speed tasks that elicit minimal demand on working memory relative to working memory tasks, which elicit a high working memory load.

    “Last, although no cognitive task is pure, there are processing speed tasks that elicit minimal demand on working memory relative to working memory tasks, which elicit a high working memory load.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Some findings suggest that paying participants to train decreases intrinsic motivation and results in lower effect sizes.

    “Specifically, some findings suggest that paying participants to train decreases intrinsic motivation and results in lower effect sizes [14,16]; although lack of remuneration does not guarantee effects.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [14] J Au, 2014, Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis, Psychon Bull Rev

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [16] SM Jaeggi, 2014, The role of individual differences in cognitive training and transfer, Mem. Cognit source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Given that dual n-back tasks also require immediate attention and updating, the additional aspect of manipulation represents a divergent aspect of working memory which can be interpreted as transfer.

    “Given that dual n-back tasks also require immediate attention and updating, the additional aspect of manipulation represents a divergent aspect of working memory which can be interpreted as transfer.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    To our knowledge, the only investigated factor impacting motivation is monetary compensation.

    “To our knowledge, the only investigated factor impacting motivation is monetary compensation [14,16].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [14] J Au, 2014, Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis, Psychon Bull Rev

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [16] SM Jaeggi, 2014, The role of individual differences in cognitive training and transfer, Mem. Cognit source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Both the digit span and operation span tasks require immediate attention, varying degrees of manipulation of information within immediate memory stores, and updating of information.

    “Both the digit span and operation span tasks require immediate attention, varying degrees of manipulation of information within immediate memory stores, and updating of information.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    Middle-age range adults might have a better chance at improving than older adults.

    “Moreover, given that cognitive plasticity is thought to decline across the aging trajectory [32], middle-age range adults might have a better chance at improving than older adults.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Lilford & Stevens suggest that small studies, provided they are well designed, nevertheless contribute to the topic and field in which they are published.

    “Despite the study being underpowered, Lilford & Stevens’ suggest that small studies, provided they are well designed, nevertheless contribute to the topic and field in which they are published [62].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [62] R Lilford, 2002, Underpowered studies, British Journal of Surgery source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The authors of the large-scale investigation posit that training with a broad range of tasks increases trainees' general learning processes and their ability to learn new tasks whether related or unrelated to the trained task.

    “The authors posit that training with a broad range of tasks increases trainees’ general learning processes and their ability to learn new tasks whether related or unrelated to the trained task.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [60] JL Hardy, 2015, Enhancing cognitive abilities with comprehensive training: A large, online, randomized, active-controlled trial, PLOS ONE

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Other forms of cognitive training have resulted in improved working memory performance for middle-aged adults.

    “Other forms of cognitive training have resulted in improved working memory performance for middle-aged adults [30].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [30] JL Hardy, 2011, Enhancing visual attention and working memory with a web-based cognitive training program, Mensa Research Journal

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Previous discussions have led to the idea that aging adults may benefit from cognitive training more than younger populations due to loss of complex cognitive performance, including dual n-back performance, with increasing age.

    “Previous discussions have led to the idea that aging adults may benefit from cognitive training more than younger populations due to loss of complex cognitive performance, including dual n-back performance, with increasing age [31].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [31] SM Jaeggi, 2009, Differential age effects in load-dependent memory processing, Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A large-scale investigation of 4,715 adults ranging in age from 18-80 demonstrated positive effects of a multi-domain training program on both trained and untrained cognitive performance.

    “More recently, a large-scale investigation of 4,715 adults ranging in age from 18–80, demonstrated positive effects of a multi-domain training program on both trained and untrained cognitive performance [60].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [60] JL Hardy, 2015, Enhancing cognitive abilities with comprehensive training: A large, online, randomized, active-controlled trial, PLOS ONE

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisereasoning

    The processing speed training program utilized for this study should not be expected to enhance complex working memory or fluid intelligence.

    “However, the processing speed training program utilized for this study should not be expected to enhance complex working memory or fluid intelligence.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In a study of 23 healthy adults (mean age 53 years) randomized to a training or no-training control group, the online training program consisted of four exercises targeting visual attention, working memory, and processing speed; relative to controls, trainees improved on measures of divided visual attention and simple visual memory span.

    “Specifically, 23 healthy adults (mean age 53 years) were randomized to a training or no-training control group. The online training program consisted of four exercises targeting visual attention, working memory, and processing speed. Relative to controls, trainees improved on measures of divided visual attention and simple visual memory span.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [30] JL Hardy, 2011, Enhancing visual attention and working memory with a web-based cognitive training program, Mensa Research Journal

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Both training programs include working memory and processing speed processes, but the extent to which these processes are emphasized within each training program is very different.

    “Although we acknowledge that both training programs include working memory and processing speed processes, the extent to which these processes are emphasized within each training program is very different.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    This suggestion is consistent with environmental enrichment theories of learning, and not specific to middle age-range healthy adults.

    “This suggestion is consistent with environmental enrichment theories of learning, and not specific to middle age-range healthy adults [60].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [60] JL Hardy, 2015, Enhancing cognitive abilities with comprehensive training: A large, online, randomized, active-controlled trial, PLOS ONE

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Cognitive plasticity is thought to decline across the aging trajectory.

    “Moreover, given that cognitive plasticity is thought to decline across the aging trajectory [32], middle-age range adults might have a better chance at improving than older adults.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [32] C Freitas, 2011, Changes in Cortical Plasticity Across the Lifespan, Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience source

      Not checked in the free run.

80 of 80

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The study had sufficient statistical power to detect training-related improvements if they existed.

    “Follow-up Bayesian analyses supported null findings for training effects for each individual composite.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The two training programs were equivalent in all nonspecific factors (e.g., expectancy, engagement) except training content.

    “Including this active comparison group rather than a no-training control group allows for all elements of the study with the exception of the specific games used in training (training content) to be controlled for.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The outcome measures were sensitive to training-related change.

    “Measures were chosen based on their use in previous investigations of working memory training, their ability to reliably measure the cognitive domains of interest, and their sensitivity to age-related differences in cognitive performance.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Participants did not engage in other forms of cognitive training during the study period.

    “Although participants were asked to not engage in other forms of “brain training” during the study period, we were unable to control for such potential contamination.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    This study is the first to explore transfer of dual n-back working memory training specifically in middle age-ranged adults.

    “This study is important as it is the first to explore transfer of dual n-back working memory training specifically in middle age-ranged adults, a population particularly interested in building up cognitive reserve.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Healthy middle-aged adults have increased interest in enhancing cognitive abilities.

    “This investigation was conducted with healthy community adults, aged 30–60, given the increased interest this population has in enhancing cognitive abilities yet lack of empirical examination as to whether working memory training is effective for healthy adults in this age group.”
6 of 6

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?

  • The active control group performed the same training protocol as the experimental groups but engaged in activities relying on perceptual abilities and progressively increasing speed demands without increments in executive load.

    “AC performed the same training protocol as their experimental counterparts, but they engaged in activities that relied on perceptual abilities and progressively increased their speed demands, without increments in executive load (Peng et al., 2012; Takeuchi and Kawashima, 2012; Lawlor-Savage and Goghari, 2016).”

    From Training on Working Memory and Inhibitory Control in Young Adults (2016) · cites this paper as Lawlor-Savage and Goghari, 2016

  • The active control group engaged in tasks essentially requiring processing speed in order to keep participants' motivation and engagement similar to those from the experimental groups.

    “Thus, the active control group engaged in tasks essentially requiring processing speed (for related approaches see Goldin et al., 2014; Lawlor-Savage and Goghari, 2016), in order to keep participants’ motivation and engagement similar to those from the experimental groups.”

    From Training on Working Memory and Inhibitory Control in Young Adults (2016) · cites this paper as Lawlor-Savage and Goghari, 2016

Statistics recomputed

Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.

  • ConsistentF(3, 52) = 0.37reported p = .77 · recomputed p = .775

    “F(3,52) = 0.37,p = .77”

  • ConsistentF(3, 52) = 0.13reported p = .94 · recomputed p = .942

    “F(3,52) = 0.13,p = .94”

  • Consistentt(55) = 0.13reported p = .9 · recomputed p = .897

    “t(55) = 0.13, p = .90”

  • Consistentt(55) = 2.67reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .010

    “t(55) = 2.67, p < .01”

  • Consistentt(55) = -0.33reported p = .74 · recomputed p = .743

    “t(55) = -0.33, p = .74”

  • Consistentt(26) = 13.05reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “t(26) = 13.05, p < .001”

  • Consistentt(30) = 12.85reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “t(30) = 12.85, p < .001”

  • Consistentt(55) = -1.55reported p = .13 · recomputed p = .127

    “t(55) = -1.55, p = .13”

  • Consistentt(51) = -1.45reported p = .15 · recomputed p = .153

    “t(51) = -1.45, p = .15”

9 of 9

Self-check

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

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Outlier-excluded comparison has an incompatible degree of freedom

    Minor

    Removing the three identified outliers from the analyzed sample of 57 leaves 54 participants. The reported two-group comparison has 51 degrees of freedom, rather than the 52 expected for 54 participants.

  • Working-memory correlation range omits a lower value

    Minor

    The stated range for correlations within the working-memory domain starts at .33, but Table 1 reports a correlation of .25 between Aospan and Digit Span Sequencing.

  • Bayes factor is described as favoring both hypotheses

    Minor

    The same 4.80:1 Bayes factor is said to favor the alternative hypothesis and a model excluding a main effect of time. The latter description instead supports the stated null finding for that effect.

  • Processing-speed paired comparison has an incompatible degree of freedom

    Minor

    The processing-speed group has 30 participants, but the first-to-last-day comparison reports t(30). A paired t-test of 30 participants has 29 degrees of freedom.

4 of 4

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 59 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. ARA Conway, 2003, Trends Cogn Sci, Trends Cogn Sci, 7, 547
  2. JL Hardy, 2011, Enhancing visual attention and working memory with a web-based cognitive training program, Mensa Research Journal, 42, 13
  3. D Wechsler, 2008, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—fourth edition technical and interpretative manual
  4. D Wechsler, 2008, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—fourth edition: Canadian manual

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lawlor-Savage, L., & Goghari, V. M.
Affiliations
University of Calgary (CA)
Corresponding author
Goghari, Vina M.
ORCID
Goghari, Vina M.
Venue
PLOS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2016-04-04
Volume
11
Issue
4
Pages
e0151817
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0151817
PMC
PMC4820261
OpenAlex
W2340060279
Semantic Scholar
985ad900567c0aaeee1ef51feaf36c48a0963c3b
Cited by
74
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 2
FWCI
10.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Canadian Psychological Association
  • Alberta Innovates
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
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, middle-aged adults, cognitive enhancement, online training, training effects, cognitive aging
MeSH terms
Adult, Cognition, Female, Humans, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Middle Aged

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-08.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-08.

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