CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 142Cognitive Abilities and TestingEducational Games and GamificationDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Differential effect of motivational features on training improvements in school-based cognitive training

Open access
Katz, Benjamin, Jaeggi, Susanne, Buschkuehl, Martin, Stegman, Alyse, Shah, Priti·2014·Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00242PMC PMC4006056
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Cognitive training often utilizes game-like motivational features to keep participants engaged. It is unclear how these elements, such as feedback, reward, and theming impact player performance during training. Recent research suggests that motivation and engagement are closely related to improvements following cognitive training. We hypothesized that training paradigms featuring game-like motivational elements would be more effective than a version with no motivational elements. Five distinct motivational features were chosen for examination: a real-time scoring system, theme changes, prizes, end-of-session certificates, and scaffolding to explain the lives and leveling system included in the game. One version of the game was created with all these motivational elements included, and one was created with all of them removed. Other versions removed a single element at a time. Seven versions of a game-like n-back working memory task were then created and administered to 128 students in second through eight grade at school-based summer camps in southeastern Michigan. The inclusion of real-time scoring during play, a popular motivational component in both entertainment games and cognitive training, was found to negatively impact training improvements over the three day period. Surprisingly, scaffolding to explain lives and levels also negatively impacted training gains. The other game adjustments did not significantly impact training improvement compared to the original version of the game with all features included. These findings are preliminary and are limited by both the small sample size and the brevity of the intervention. Nonetheless, these findings suggest that certain motivational elements may distract from the core cognitive training task, reducing task improvement, especially at the initial stage of learning.

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 · 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00242

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

FIGURE 1 Object 2-back task. Participants were presented with a sequence of pictures and they were instructed to indicate whether the current picture was the same as the one 2 pictures back in the sequence.
FIGURE 1 Object 2-back task. Participants were presented with a sequence of pictures and they were instructed to indicate whether the current picture was the same as the one 2 pictures back in the sequence.CC BY · PubMed Central
FIGURE 2 Game elements. Shown here are the three versions of the game theme, the appearance of the game in the original theme if points or lives and levels were removed, the prize box and a sampling of prizes given, and the level certificate template used in the study.
FIGURE 2 Game elements. Shown here are the three versions of the game theme, the appearance of the game in the original theme if points or lives and levels were removed, the prize box and a sampling of prizes given, and the level certificate template used in the study.CC BY · PubMed Central
FIGURE 3 Average game performance (n-back level) across all individuals on each day. Error bars represent standard error.
FIGURE 3 Average game performance (n-back level) across all individuals on each day. Error bars represent standard error.CC BY · PubMed Central
FIGURE 4 Average game performance (n-back level) at baseline for each game version. Error bars represent standard error.
FIGURE 4 Average game performance (n-back level) at baseline for each game version. Error bars represent standard error.CC BY · PubMed Central
FIGURE 5 Adjusted means of training slope by game-type controlling for age and baseline n-back level. Means are estimated at age = 10.65 and baseline n-back = 2.49. Error bars represent standard error. *p < 0.05.
FIGURE 5 Adjusted means of training slope by game-type controlling for age and baseline n-back level. Means are estimated at age = 10.65 and baseline n-back = 2.49. Error bars represent standard error. *p < 0.05.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 29 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Toups, 2009, “Motivating play through score,” in, ACM Computer Human Interaction 2009 Workshop on Engagement by Design

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–142 of 142

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Katz, B., Jaeggi, S., Buschkuehl, M., Stegman, A., & Shah, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • University of California, Irvine (US)
  • MIND Research Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Katz, Benjamin
ORCID
Venue
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2014-04-24
Volume
8
Pages
242-242
ISSN
1662-5161 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/fnhum.2014.00242
PMC
PMC4006056
OpenAlex
W2097579685
Cited by
142
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 1
FWCI
17.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Human Neuroscience (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)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • VTechWorks (Virginia Tech) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
Keywords
cognitive training, game-based learning, real-time scoring, scaffolding, transfer of training, student engagement

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