CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 63Educational Games and GamificationCognitive Abilities and TestingNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Dissociable effects of game elements on motivation and cognition in a task-switching training in middle childhood

Open access
Dörrenbächer, Sandra, Müller, Philipp M., Tröger, Johannes, Kray, Jutta·2014·Frontiers in Psychology
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01275PMC PMC4230167
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Although motivational reinforcers are often used to enhance the attractiveness of trainings of cognitive control in children, little is known about how such motivational manipulations of the setting contribute to separate gains in motivation and cognitive-control performance. Here we provide a framework for systematically investigating the impact of a motivational video-game setting on the training motivation, the task performance, and the transfer success in a task-switching training in middle-aged children (8-11 years of age). We manipulated both the type of training (low-demanding/single-task training vs. high-demanding/task-switching training) as well as the motivational setting (low-motivational/without video-game elements vs. high-motivational/with video-game elements) separately from another. The results indicated that the addition of game elements to a training setting enhanced the intrinsic interest in task practice, independently of the cognitive demands placed by the training type. In the task-switching group, the high-motivational training setting led to an additional enhancement of task and switching performance during the training phase right from the outset. These motivation-induced benefits projected onto the switching performance in a switching situation different from the trained one (near-transfer measurement). However, in structurally dissimilar cognitive tasks (far-transfer measurement), the motivational gains only transferred to the response dynamics (speed of processing). Hence, the motivational setting clearly had a positive impact on the training motivation and on the paradigm-specific task-switching abilities; it did not, however, consistently generalize on broad cognitive processes. These findings shed new light on the conflation of motivation and cognition in childhood and may help to refine guidelines for designing adequate training interventions.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Adding game elements to a task-switching training for 8–11-year-olds increased intrinsic interest and speeded task/switching performance, especially in the high-motivational switching group. Benefits transferred to a similar switching task but only inconsistently to far-transfer inhibition and not to working memory.

Key findings

  • High-motivational (HM) groups chose more optional training blocks than low-motivational (LM) groups, [F(1, 49) = 21.81, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.31], with no effect of training type (p = 0.59); willingness declined across sessions, [F(3,147) = 5.99, p < 0.01, η2p = 0.11].
  • During training, HM groups responded faster than LM groups, [F(1, 50) = 10.63, p < 0.01, η2p = 0.17], and this setting effect was significant between switching groups, [F(1, 25) = 10.18, p < 0.01, η2p = 0.17]; switching groups improved more over time than single-task groups, [F(1, 50) = 17.39, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.10].
  • In switching training, HM showed smaller switching costs than LM, [F(1, 25) = 5.88, p < 0.05, η2p = 0.19]; switching costs fell from 173 ms to 52 ms in the HM group and from 244 ms to 179 ms in the LM group.
  • Near transfer: switching-HM showed a greater reduction in latency switch costs than switching-LM, [F(1, 48) = 4.41, p < 0.05, η2p = 0.09], with the largest RT switch-cost effect size in switching-HM (d′ = 0.86 vs. d′ = 0.15–0.57). Far transfer was limited: faster Stroop/AX-CPT responding in switching-HM, no Stroop interference-cost change, larger AX-CPT interference-cost reduction after single-task training, [F(1, 48) = 9.42, p < 0.01, η2p = 0.18], and no group-differential WM transfer.

Methods

  • Pretest–training–posttest design with an active control: 54 children aged 8.10–11.10 years (mean = 9.64, SD = 0.80, 48.1% female) were assigned to single-LM (n = 13), single-HM (n = 14), switching-LM (n = 14), or switching-HM (n = 13).
  • Training comprised four sessions of single-task or task-switching practice under low- or high-motivational game settings; pre/post sessions measured task switching, Stroop, AX-CPT, Digit Span Backward, and Counting Span.
  • Analyses used mixed ANOVAs with a priori orthogonal group contrasts, median RT and error rates, and Cohen’s d/Hedges-corrected effect sizes.

Limitations

  • Stated: small group sample sizes; need for greater transparency of baseline scores and motivational susceptibility; lack of supplemental self-report measures; inability to identify which specific game elements drove effects; transfer tasks were presented in standard low-motivational settings.
  • Evident from the text: error rates increased over training and transfer, especially in switching-HM, suggesting a possible speed–accuracy trade-off; baseline differences existed between switching-LM and switching-HM on error switch costs, requiring cautious interpretation of transfer effects.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01275

Cites

81 of 81 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

51 tests recomputed · 0 with the reported and recomputed p on opposite sides of .05

Claims the paper makes

0 of 47 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    In structurally dissimilar cognitive tasks (far-transfer measurement), the motivational gains only transferred to the response dynamics (speed of processing).

    “However, in structurally dissimilar cognitive tasks (far-transfer measurement), the motivational gains only transferred to the response dynamics (speed of processing).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    In the task-switching group, the high-motivational training setting led to an additional enhancement of switching performance during the training phase right from the outset.

    “In the task-switching group, the high-motivational training setting led to an additional enhancement of task and switching performance during the training phase right from the outset.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Motivation-induced benefits projected onto switching performance in a switching situation different from the trained one (near-transfer measurement).

    “These motivation-induced benefits projected onto the switching performance in a switching situation different from the trained one (near-transfer measurement).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    In the task-switching group, the high-motivational training setting led to an additional enhancement of task performance during the training phase right from the outset.

    “In the task-switching group, the high-motivational training setting led to an additional enhancement of task and switching performance during the training phase right from the outset.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    The addition of game elements to a training setting enhanced the intrinsic interest in task practice, independently of the cognitive demands placed by the training type.

    “The results indicated that the addition of game elements to a training setting enhanced the intrinsic interest in task practice, independently of the cognitive demands placed by the training type.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 51
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 3
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 32

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Mixing costs in the near-transfer accuracy data were slightly reduced, but not in the switching-HM group.

    “Mixing costs were slightly reduced (but not in the switching-HM group, see Figure 7), [F(1, 51) = 2.96, p < 0.05, η2p = 0.05].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The Session effect on Stroop latencies was dependent on the training type and on the motivational setting, showing that both factors contributed to a reduction of latencies.

    “This effect was dependent on the training type, [F(1, 48) = 7.45, p < 0.01, η2p = 0.14], and on the motivational setting, [F(1, 48) = 5.76, p < 0.05, η2p = 0.11], showing that both factors contributed to a reduction of latencies.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Statistically, there were no differential effects on global mixing costs even though the effect sizes pointed to such an advantage for the high-motivational switching condition.

    “Statistically, we found no differential effects on global mixing costs even though the ES pointed to such an advantage for the high-motivational switching condition.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In the near-transfer accuracy data, there were reliable mixing costs and switching costs.

    “Results also revealed reliable mixing costs, [F(1, 51) = 18.18, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.26], and switching costs, [F(1, 51) = 47.36, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.48].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In the near-transfer task, there were reliable mixing costs and switching costs.

    “In addition, results indicated reliable mixing costs, [F(1, 51) = 179.34, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.78], as well as switching costs, [F(1, 51) = 142.01, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.74].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    A task-switching training embedded into a high-motivational setting led to the highest gain in response speed and to the largest reduction of switching costs in the near-transfer task.

    “To sum up, the training benefits projected fairly consistently onto latencies and specific switch costs in the near-transfer task: a task-switching training embedded into a high-motivational setting led to the highest gain in response speed and to the largest reduction of switching costs.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    The switching-HM condition also showed a larger increase of error rates, which proved to be unsubstantial.

    “The latter condition also showed a larger increase of error rates, which again proved to be unsubstantial.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The change of mixing costs in the near-transfer task was neither modulated by the training type nor by the motivational setting.

    “However, the change of mixing costs was neither modulated by the training type (p = 0.63) nor by the motivational setting (p = 0.49).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    There were neither group main effects nor nested modulations in the expected directions on error rates.

    “Regarding the pairwise comparisons, we found neither group main effects nor nested modulations in the expected directions.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The switching group with an HM-setting showed a linear decrease in switching costs across the four practice sessions and no empirical support for a quadratic change.

    “The switching group with an HM-setting clearly showed a linear decrease in switching costs across the four practice sessions, [F(1, 12) = 8.20, p < 0.05, η2p = 0.41], and no empirical support for a quadratic change (p = 0.35).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The motivational differences in error-rate change were large between task-switching groups, F(1,50)=8.41, p<0.01, η2p=0.05, while unsubstantial between single-task groups (p=0.42).

    “These motivational differences were large between the task-switching groups, [F(1, 50) = 8.41, p < 0.01, η2p = 0.05], while being unsubstantial between the single-task groups (p = 0.42).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The switching group with an LM-setting showed a significant quadratic trend in switching costs but no reliable linear trend.

    “The opposite pattern was found for the switching group with an LM-setting, namely a significant quadratic trend, [F(1, 13) = 14.57, p < 0.01, η2p = 0.53], but no reliable linear trend (p = 0.30).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The motivational setting differed between switching-training groups, F(1,25)=10.18, p<0.01, η2p=0.17, but not between single-task groups (p=0.08).

    “Finally, when nesting the training-setting factor beyond the training type, the motivational setting only differed between the switching-training groups, [F(1, 25) = 10.18, p < 0.01, η2p = 0.17], and not between the single-task groups (p = 0.08).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Both mixing and switching costs were substantially reduced from pretest to posttest in the near-transfer task.

    “Both mixing and switching costs were substantially reduced from pretest to posttest, [F(1, 51) = 58.68, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.54], and [F(1, 51) = 14.30, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.22], respectively.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The effect sizes for error costs were in essence congruent with the variance-analytical results, with the switching-HM group yielding maximum effect size for the increase in error switching costs (d′ = −1.46).

    “The ES for error costs were, in essence, congruent with the variance-analytical results. That is to say, the switching-HM group yielded maximum ES for the increase in error switching costs (switching-HM: d′ = −1.46) as compared to the other groups (single-LM: d′ = −0.27; single-HM: d′ = −0.48; and especially as compared to the switching-LM group: d′ = 0.05)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In the training task, errors and error costs increased concurrently over time, and this increase extended to the transfer measurements and was most pronounced in the switching-HM group.

    “a major point for discussion was the concurrent increase of errors and error costs over time. This increase also extended to the transfer measurements and was most pronounced in the switching-HM group.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    There was a slight decline of accuracy (at least in the Stroop task), which was not as distinctive as in the tasks of training or near transfer.

    “There was again a slight decline of accuracy (at least in the Stroop task), which was not as distinctive as in the tasks of training or near transfer.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The switching-HM group showed better performance compared to the respective LM-group right from the beginning of the training although both groups did not differ in task-switching performance at pretest serving as a baseline measure.

    “The switching-HM group showed better performance compared to the respective LM-group right from the beginning of the training although both groups did not differ in task-switching performance at pretest serving as a baseline measure.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The switching-LM group revealed a rebound in the fourth training session, driven by a linear decrease in non-switch trials and a stagnating performance in switch trials from the third to the fourth training session.

    “However, the switching-LM group revealed a rebound in the fourth training session: A comparison of RTs indicated that the latter effect was driven by a linear decrease in non-switch trials and a stagnating performance in switch trials from the third to the fourth training session.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The latency changes in the inhibition tasks partly reflected the former findings: for both the Stroop task and the AX-CPT, the switching-HM group entered the highest profit on the response dynamics.

    “By relating the results of far transfer to the ones of training or near transfer, we were able to demonstrate that the latency changes in the inhibition tasks partly reflected the former findings: For both measures (Stroop task, AX-CPT), the switching-HM group entered the highest profit on the response dynamics.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    With regard to near transfer, the switching-HM group showed an advantage not only in reducing response latencies but also in reducing latency switch costs as compared to the respective LM group.

    “With regard to near transfer, we found that the switching-HM group showed an advantage not only in reducing response latencies but also in reducing latency switch costs as compared to the respective LM group.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In the AX-CPT, the motivational setting differed only between the switching groups and not between the single-task groups.

    “The motivational setting differed only between the switching groups, [F(1, 48) = 6.15, p < 0.01, η2p = 0.12], and not between the single-task groups (p = 0.91).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Effect sizes for latency interference costs in the Stroop task were low and comparable across groups (d′ = 0.07 to −0.32).

    “Accordingly, ES for latency interference costs were low and comparable across groups (d′ = 0.07–d′ = −0.32).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In the Stroop task, there were reliable interference costs, which did not change over time and were not modulated by group.

    “We obtained reliable interference costs, [F(1, 51) = 70.11, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.58], which did not change over time (p = 0.54) and were not modulated by group (all ps > 0.07).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Two negative speed-accuracy correlations were substantial for the single-HM group on the training task, but not for the switching-HM group, and these correlations turned positive on the near-transfer task.

    “If any, we revealed two negative speed-accuracy correlations to be substantial for the single-HM group (and not for the switching-HM group deemed to be the most critical one) on the training task, which yet turned out to be positive on the near-transfer task.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In the Stroop task, interference costs on accuracy were present and were significantly reduced from pre- to post-test.

    “We also found interference costs as neutral trials were substantially better performed than incongruent trials, [F(1, 51) = 19.69, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.28], and those costs were significantly reduced from pre-to post-test, [F(1, 51) = 7.53, p < 0.01, η2p = 0.13].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    The consistent motivational benefit was limited to behavioral dynamics (speed of processing), whereas effects on broad cognitive-control processes were rather limited.

    “This consistent motivational benefit was limited to the behavioral dynamics (speed of processing) whereas effects on broad cognitive-control processes were rather limited.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The results on near and far transfer effects of this study are only partly in line with previous findings: there was rather limited transfer of a switching training, even when embedded in a high-motivational game setting.

    “The results on near and far transfer effects of this study are only partly in line with previous findings: we revealed rather limited transfer of a switching training, and even if this was embedded in a high-motivational game setting.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The general ratio of costs was very low right from the beginning, with interference costs around 50 ms at pretest.

    “With regard to the descriptive pattern, we could state that, for the present study, the general ratio of costs was very low right from the beginning. Interference costs were around 50 ms at pretest, leaving little room for further improvement.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The motivational setting had a positive impact on training motivation and on paradigm-specific task-switching abilities.

    “Hence, the motivational setting clearly had a positive impact on the training motivation and on the paradigm-specific task-switching abilities; it did not, however, consistently generalize on broad cognitive processes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    More demanding tasks increase subsequent effort mobilization.

    “More recently, Gendolla (2000) found that more demanding tasks increase subsequent effort mobilization.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gendolla, 2000 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In Prins et al. (2011), the difficulty level was not adjusted to performance in the high-motivational game condition, whereas in the low-motivational condition task difficulty was adaptive on a trial-by-trial basis.

    “Another critical point of the study by Prins et al. (2011) was that in the high-motivational game condition, the difficulty level was not adjusted to performance (i.e., trials of varying difficulty were presented in a random fashion), whereas in the low-motivational condition, the task difficulty was adaptive on a trial-by-trial basis.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Prins et al., 2011 source

      Not checked in the free run.

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

    Premisecitation

    Comparable performance gains from a task-switching training on inhibition and verbal working memory were found for children with attention deficit-/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD; age range 7-12 years).

    “Comparable performance gains from a task-switching training on inhibition and verbal WM were also found for children with attention deficit-/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD; age range: 7–12 years; Kray et al., 2012).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kray et al., 2012 source

      Not checked in the free run.

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

    Premisecitation

    Task-switching training in middle-aged children produced far transfer effects to inhibition as well as verbal and visuospatial working memory or fluid intelligence.

    “The results also showed far transfer effects to inhibition as well as verbal and visuospatial WM or fluid intelligence.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Karbach and Kray, 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Individuals try harder when they perceive the task difficulty to be higher.

    “As Ach (1935) described in his classic difficulty law of motivation, individuals are assumed to try harder when they perceive the task difficulty to be higher.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ach, 1935

      Not checked in the free run.

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

    Study design and conductcitation

    All Cohen's d values were corrected for small sample bias using the Hedges and Olkin correction factor.

    “All d-values were corrected for small sample bias using the Hedges and Olkin's (1985) correction factor (d′; see also Karbach and Kray, 2009).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Hedges and Olkin's (1985)

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Karbach and Kray, 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

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

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The gender ratio was kept constant across groups to counterbalance a possible gender asymmetry in predilections for video-game playing.

    “Importantly, the gender ratio was kept constant across groups in order to counterbalance a possible gender asymmetry in predilections for video-game playing.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Children performed 24 experimental blocks irrespective of their choice to play additional blocks, to disentangle training motivation and training duration.

    “Therefore, we ensured that children performed 24 experimental blocks irrespectively of their actual choice to play additional blocks.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    To minimize motivational fluctuations, feedback was presented after each whole block rather than on a trial-by-trial basis.

    “In order to minimize these fluctuations, our feedback was presented after each whole block and not on a trial-by-trial basis.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    Correlations between latencies and error rates in the training data were negligible in most conditions, ruling out speed-accuracy trade-offs as an explanation for group differences.

    “To rule out this possibility of group differences in trade-offs, we correlated latencies and error rates (or the respective switching costs) for the separate experimental conditions. However, these correlations all proved to be negligible (all ps > 0.06), with the exception of two significant negative correlations in the single-HM group (r = −0.64, and r = −0.57, both ps < 0.05) and one significant”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

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

    Study design and conductown data

    The latency cut-offs were derived from the empirical RT frequency distributions of each task.

    “The cut-offs were derived from the empirical RT frequency distributions of each task.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The study presented adaptive feedback in all training groups, using the same adaptive feedback algorithm in all training conditions.

    “Importantly, our motivational manipulation was designed to be independent of the amount of training experience and we presented adaptive feedback in all groups.”
    • Also stated in: § Empirical evidence for the effects of motivation on cognitive training interventions · plain
      “In the present study, we thus used the same adaptive feedback algorithm in all training conditions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

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

    Premisecitation

    With the occurrence of interference in conflicting Stroop trials, an adaptive increase in selective attention has been found.

    “With the occurrence of interference, for example in conflicting Stroop trials, an adaptive increase in selective attention has been found (Egner, 2007; see also Van Steenbergen, 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Egner, 2007 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Van Steenbergen, 2011

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    To prevent baseline differences between groups, subjects were matched to one of the four training groups based on age, pretest task-switching performance (mixing costs), basic fluid abilities (DSST), and crystallized abilities (Spot-a-Word Test).

    “To prevent baseline differences between groups, subjects were matched to one of the four training groups based on their age, their pretest performance in task switching (mixing costs), their basic fluid abilities (perceptual speed, Digit Symbol Substitution Test/DSST, Wechsler, 1955) and their crystallized abilities (verbal knowledge, Spot-a-Word Test, Lehrl, 1977).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Wechsler, 1955

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Lehrl, 1977

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The study's motivational manipulation was designed to be independent of the amount of training experience.

    “Importantly, our motivational manipulation was designed to be independent of the amount of training experience and we presented adaptive feedback in all groups.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

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

    Study design and conductnone given

    Each cognitive construct was measured by two indicators to increase measurement reliability.

    “Each construct was measured by two indicators to increase the reliability of the measurement.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    Pretest analyses did not display any group main effects or interactions on latencies, error rates, test scores, or cost level.

    “The analyses did not display any group main effects or interactions, regarding both latencies and error rates or test scores, respectively. The analyses also did not yield effects on the cost level (all ps > 0.11).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Even cognitive control might be affected by the interaction of cognitive demands and motivation.

    “Specifically, even cognitive control might be affected by the interaction of cognitive demands and motivation (see also Sergeant, 2005).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Sergeant, 2005 source

      Not checked in the free run.

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

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Willingness to perform an optional training block was asked five times per session as an objective index of motivation and as a manipulation check of the game-setting variation.

    “In order to obtain an objective index for the children's motivation on the training task and as a manipulation check of the variation in game setting, children of all groups were asked whether they were willing to perform an optional training block (see Figure 4) five times per session.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Children should not become aware that they did not train any more blocks as a result of the manipulation.

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

    Premisecitation

    Motivation is an energizing force that acts in a driven manner and may therefore preferentially affect response dynamics and the speed of processing.

    “We aimed at examining children's motivation, which is, by definition, an energizing force (Sergeant, 2000; Locke and Braver, 2010) that acts in a driven manner and may therefore preferentially affect response dynamics and the speed of processing.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Sergeant, 2000 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Locke and Braver, 2010

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The motivation score was independent of the amount of training experience as the willingness decisions had no actual effects on the further training course.

    “Importantly, our motivation score was independent of the amount of training experience as we ensured that the willingness decisions had no actual effects on the further training course.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

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

    Interpretationown data

    The reductions in switching and mixing costs in the single-task groups may indicate a mere practice gain driven by task familiarization.

    “maybe indicating a mere practice gain driven by task familiarization.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The HM-setting seemed to have exerted an immediately positive impact on task and switching performance, suggesting that game elements are well suited to enhance task engagement and cognitive-control performance on the top of training interest (training willingness).

    “Thus, our HM-setting seemed to have exerted an immediately positive impact on task and switching performance, suggesting that game elements are well suited to enhance task engagement and cognitive-control performance on the top of training interest (training willingness).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationown data

    The concurrent increase of errors and error costs over time pointed to a shift from accurate to faster task execution, particularly in the switching-HM condition.

    “This finding pointed to a shift from accurate to faster task execution, particularly in the latter condition.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

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

    Interpretationreasoning

    The motivational impetus might have tapped into the natural maturation process of the shifting system.

    “That is to say, our motivational impetus might have tapped into the natural maturation process of the shifting system.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: In the present study, the authors assumed an interplay between motivational and cognitive components.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Although a game setting generally led to a greater training willingness, this pure setting was not sufficient to overcome the motivational loss over time in children.

    “Hence, the present study provided an important insight: although a game setting generally led to a greater training willingness, this pure setting was not sufficient to overcome the motivational loss over time in children.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

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

    Interpretationreasoning

    The present findings might be interpreted as reflecting the developmental trajectory of speed-accuracy trade-offs, meaning that children in general do not take the time necessary for precision.

    “Similarly, our findings might thus be interpreted as reflecting the developmental trajectory of trade-offs, meaning that children, in general, do not take the time necessary for precision.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

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

    Premisecitation

    Davidson et al. (2006) describe a general developmental change course of speed-accuracy trade-offs in executive tasks with increased impulsiveness at younger age.

    “Davidson et al. (2006) describe a general developmental change course of speed-accuracy trade-offs in executive tasks with an increased impulsiveness at younger age.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Davidson et al. (2006) source

      Not checked in the free run.

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

    Premisecitation

    Previous research on commercial video-game playing revealed pronounced benefits on processing speed.

    “In support of this, previous research on commercial video-game playing revealed pronounced benefits on processing speed (e.g., Dye et al., 2009).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dye et al., 2009 source

      Not checked in the free run.

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

    Interpretationreasoning

    The acceleration effect might not have been tracked on mixing costs because maintenance abilities continue to develop more slowly into adolescence.

    “However, this acceleration effect might have not been tracked on mixing costs as maintenance abilities continue to develop more slowly into adolescence.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: In the present study, the authors assumed an interplay between motivational and cognitive components.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    This finding validates the efficiency of the motivational manipulation and underlines the value of an implementation of the SDT to foster training motivation in children.

    “This finding validates the efficiency of our motivational manipulation and underlines the value of an implementation of the SDT to foster training motivation in children (cf. Ryan et al., 2006).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ryan et al., 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The adaptivity of the training procedure (by providing adaptive feedback) was kept constant across groups.

    “The adaptivity of the training procedure (here by providing adaptive feedback) was also kept constant across groups.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The single task required vigilance to respond to a continuous low-demanding stimulus stream, which is similarly necessary for the AX-CPT in the present variant.

    “This might have been expected since the single task required the participant's vigilance to respond to a continuous low-demanding stimulus stream; and this is similarly necessary to meet the demands of the AX-CPT in the present variant.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

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

    Interpretationcitation

    Differences in stimulus complexity between the two Stroop measures may have reduced the advent of ceiling performances in children at the beginning of the training.

    “Differences in the stimulus complexity between both measures may have reduced the advent of ceiling performances in children at the beginning of the training.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

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

    Interpretationreasoning

    Visuo-spatial facets of WM were possibly more sensitive to get in resonance with the trained abilities; alternatively, only the aggregation across different modalities of WM resulted in sufficient task power to uncover latent transfer to this cognitive domain.

    “Visuo-spatial facets of WM were possibly more sensitive to get in resonance with the trained abilities; alternatively, only the aggregation across different modalities of WM resulted in a sufficient amount of task power to uncover the latent transfer to this cognitive domain.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

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

    Study design and conductnone given

    The study did not state which one of the varied game elements specifically contributed to the enhancement of interest or performance.

    “Moreover, our study did not state which one of the varied game elements (story framework, stimulus material, task labels, goal instructions, feedback presentation, feedback rewards) specifically contributed to the enhancement of interest (or performance).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The motivational impetus by contextual enrichment tapped into cognitive task performance, and this effect sustained beyond the training phase and projected, at least partly, onto the effort spent on other tasks, even if those were presented in standard, low-motivational settings.

    “The motivational impetus by contextual enrichment tapped into cognitive task performance where this effect sustained beyond the training phase and projected, at least partly, onto the effort spent on other tasks (even if those were presented in standard, low-motivational settings).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Karbach and Kray (2009) stated that their far-transfer results should be interpreted with caution as such effects might be hard to replicate in small samples.

    “Karbach and Kray (2009) even stated that their far-transfer results should be interpreted with caution as such effects might be hard to replicate in small samples.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Karbach and Kray (2009) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Only the aggregation across the different types of treatment resulted in an analyzable sample size of n = 42 participants, providing sufficient power to detect transfer on WM.

    “Only the aggregation across the different types of the treatment resulted in an analyzable sample size of n = 42 participants, providing sufficient power to detect transfer on WM.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Karbach and Kray (2009) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    According to the compensation view, children with ADHD could gain even more from a motivational manipulation, as supported by Dovis et al. (2011).

    “According to the compensation view, they could thus gain even more from a motivational manipulation, which is supported by the findings of Dovis et al. (2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dovis et al. (2011) source

      Not checked in the free run.

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

    Interpretationreasoning

    The lack of clear benefits may also be due to differences in susceptibility for motivational input between typically developed children and subclinical groups of children with ADHD.

    “This lack of clear benefits, which have previously been found (e.g., Kray et al., 2012), may also be due to differences in the susceptibility for motivational input between typically developed children and subclinical groups of children with ADHD.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kray et al., 2012 source

      Not checked in the free run.

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

    Interpretationreasoning

    The low-motivational transfer settings might have counteracted the motivational modulation on transfer by opening an artificial gap between the effects of the high-motivational training task and the low-motivational transfer tasks.

    “This might have counteracted our motivational modulation on transfer by opening an artificial gap between the effects of the high-motivational training task and the low-motivational transfer tasks.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Karbach and Kray (2009) employed two various Stroop versions with different stimulus dimensions (a Color Stroop version and a Number Stroop version) and collapsed data across both variants.

    “However, they employed two various Stroop versions with different stimulus dimensions (i.e., a Color Stroop version and a Number Stroop version) and collapsed data across both variants.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Karbach and Kray (2009) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    The classic Stroop task is virtually organized in a single-task setting and thus lacks the most demanding condition of switching between responding to the ink of the words and responding to the meaning of the words.

    “The classic Stroop task, however, is virtually organized in a single-task setting and thus lacks the most demanding condition: to switch between responding to the ink of the words once (as in the present case) and responding to the meaning of the words once, respectively.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Davidson et al. (2006) emphasized that the true demanding cognitive requirement is imposed by the switching context, that is, by a continuous claim for switching back and forth between tasks.

    “Davidson et al. (2006) emphasized that the true demanding cognitive requirement is imposed by the switching context, that is, by a continuous claim for switching back and forth between tasks.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Davidson et al. (2006) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Adding game elements and inducing self-determinative feelings did indeed synergize with task interest but tapped the level of cognitive control only in passing.

    “By referring to this hypothesized interaction framework, we can conclude that adding game elements and inducing self-determinative feelings did indeed synergize with task interest but tapped the level of cognitive control only in passing.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: In the present study, the authors assumed an interplay between motivational and cognitive components.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The transfer measures in the present study were presented in standard, low-motivational settings.

    “Finally, it is important to note that the transfer measures in the present study were presented in standard, low-motivational settings.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Those subgroups might have more need for compensation.

    “Those subgroups might have more need for compensation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Hussey and Novick (2012) emphasize that transfer highly depends on whether the involved training and transfer tasks provoke similar processing demands through a shared task structure.

    “Hussey and Novick (2012) emphasize that transfer highly depends on whether the involved (training and transfer) tasks provoke similar processing demands through a shared task structure.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hussey and Novick (2012)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Children with ADHD show a genuine motivation deficit or, in terms of the CEM, a non-optimal energetic state.

    “Children with ADHD show a genuine motivation deficit (e.g., Haenlein and Caul, 1987) or, in terms of the CEM, a non-optimal energetic state (Sergeant, 2000).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Haenlein and Caul, 1987 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Sergeant, 2000 source

      Not checked in the free run.

80 of 80

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    It is not clear how and whether modifications of the training setting influence training motivation and training success.

    “However, so far it is not quite clear how and whether such modifications of the training setting indeed influence training motivation and training success.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Much of the research on video-game implementations does not directly test the beneficial effect of the game setting on intrinsic interest and task effort.

    “Much of this research, however, does not directly test the beneficial effect of the game setting on intrinsic interest and task effort.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The variations of the task-design elements tap the basic needs of the self-determinative power of video-games.

    “To sum up, the variations of the task-design elements were assumed to tap the basic needs of the self-determinative power of video-games.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The instructional design properties enhance intrinsic motivation and induce self-determinative feelings.

    “These instructional design properties were supposed to enhance intrinsic motivation and to induce self-determinative feelings.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Children should not become aware that they did not train any more blocks as a result of the manipulation.

    “As a result of the manipulation, children should not become aware of the fact that they did not train any more blocks.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The bonus enabled a continuous winning chance, ensuring that the child maintained a relatively constant interest level by being protected from too much frustration.

    “This bonus enabled a continuous winning chance, ensuring that the child maintained a relatively constant interest level by being protected from too much frustration.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A positive block feedback was individually challenging but not too difficult to achieve.

    “A positive block feedback was individually challenging but not too difficult to achieve.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    In the present study, the authors assumed an interplay between motivational and cognitive components.

    “In the present study, we had assumed an interplay between motivational and cognitive components.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The AX-CPT has not yet been applied as a transfer measure of inhibitory control in previous task-switching training studies.

    “To our best knowledge, the AX-CPT has not yet been applied as a transfer measure of inhibitory control in previous task-switching training studies.”
9 of 9

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?

Statistics that don’t add up

Each reported p-value recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom.

  • p-value fits an unstated one-tailed test: F(1, 51) = 2.96, p < .05

    Minor

    The paper reports p < .05 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .091. The reported value is what a one-tailed test gives, but the paper does not say near this result that a one-tailed test was used.

    Reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .091

  • p-value fits an unstated one-tailed test: F(1, 50) = 5.86, p < .01

    Minor

    The paper reports p < .01 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .019. The reported value is what a one-tailed test gives, but the paper does not say near this result that a one-tailed test was used.

    Reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .019

  • p-value fits an unstated one-tailed test: F(1, 25) = 7.56, p < .01

    Minor

    The paper reports p < .01 here; recomputing from the test statistic and its degrees of freedom gives p = .011. The reported value is what a one-tailed test gives, but the paper does not say near this result that a one-tailed test was used.

    Reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .011

3 of 3

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.

  • Doesn’t add upF(1, 50) = 5.86reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .019

    “F(1, 50) = 5.86, p < .01”

  • Doesn’t add upF(1, 25) = 7.56reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .011

    “F(1, 25) = 7.56, p < .01”

  • Doesn’t add upF(1, 51) = 2.96reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .091

    “F(1, 51) = 2.96, p < .05”

  • Not confirmedF(1, 48) = 3.76reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .058

    “F(1, 48) = 3.76, p < .05”

  • Not confirmedF(1, 48) = 3.5reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .067

    “F(1, 48) = 3.50, p < .05”

  • Not confirmedF(1, 48) = 6.15reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .017

    “F(1, 48) = 6.15, p < .01”

  • ConsistentF(1, 49) = 21.81reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 49) = 21.81, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 25) = 13.91reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 25) = 13.91, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(3, 147) = 5.99reported p < .01 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(3,147) = 5.99, p < .01”

  • ConsistentF(1, 50) = 10.63reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .002

    “F(1, 50) = 10.63, p < .01”

  • ConsistentF(1, 25) = 10.18reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .004

    “F(1, 25) = 10.18, p < .01”

  • ConsistentF(3, 150) = 21.02reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(3,150) = 21.02, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 50) = 17.39reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 50) = 17.39, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(3, 150) = 12.04reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(3,150) = 12.04, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 50) = 6.92reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .011

    “F(1, 50) = 6.92, p < .05”

  • ConsistentF(1, 50) = 8.41reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .006

    “F(1, 50) = 8.41, p < .01”

  • ConsistentF(1, 25) = 66.95reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 25) = 66.95, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 25) = 5.88reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .023

    “F(1, 25) = 5.88, p < .05”

  • ConsistentF(3, 75) = 5.87reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .001

    “F(3, 75) = 5.87, p < .01”

  • ConsistentF(1, 12) = 8.2reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .014

    “F(1, 12) = 8.20, p < .05”

  • ConsistentF(1, 13) = 14.57reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .002

    “F(1, 13) = 14.57, p < .01”

  • ConsistentF(1, 25) = 33.08reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 25) = 33.08, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(3, 75) = 4.8reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .004

    “F(3, 75) = 4.80, p < .01”

  • ConsistentF(3, 36) = 3.12reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .038

    “F(3, 36) = 3.12, p < .05”

  • ConsistentF(3, 39) = 2.92reported p = .05 · recomputed p = .046

    “F(3, 39) = 2.92, p = .05”

  • ConsistentF(1, 25) = 5.01reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .034

    “F(1, 25) = 5.01, p < .05”

  • ConsistentF(1, 48) = 69.54reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 48) = 69.54, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 51) = 179.34reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 51) = 179.34, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 51) = 142.01reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 51) = 142.01, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 51) = 58.68reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 51) = 58.68, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 51) = 14.3reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 51) = 14.30, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 48) = 4.41reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .041

    “F(1, 48) = 4.41, p < .05”

  • ConsistentF(1, 48) = 4.6reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .037

    “F(1, 48) = 4.60, p < .05”

  • ConsistentF(1, 48) = 6.5reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .014

    “F(1, 48) = 6.50, p < .05”

  • ConsistentF(1, 51) = 18.18reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 51) = 18.18, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 51) = 47.36reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 51) = 47.36, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 51) = 5.61reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .022

    “F(1, 51) = 5.61, p < .05”

  • ConsistentF(1, 25) = 5.95reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .022

    “F(1, 25) = 5.95, p < .05”

  • ConsistentF(1, 48) = 21.27reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 48) = 21.27, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 48) = 7.45reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .009

    “F(1, 48) = 7.45, p < .01”

  • ConsistentF(1, 48) = 5.76reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .020

    “F(1, 48) = 5.76, p < .05”

  • ConsistentF(1, 51) = 70.11reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 51) = 70.11, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 48) = 13.98reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 48) = 13.98, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 51) = 19.69reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 51) = 19.69, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 51) = 7.53reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .008

    “F(1, 51) = 7.53, p < .01”

  • ConsistentF(1, 48) = 6.51reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .014

    “F(1, 48) = 6.51, p < .05”

  • ConsistentF(1, 51) = 120.34reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 51) = 120.34, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 51) = 8.82reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .005

    “F(1, 51) = 8.82, p < .05”

  • ConsistentF(1, 48) = 9.42reported p < .01 · recomputed p = .004

    “F(1, 48) = 9.42, p < .01”

  • ConsistentF(1, 51) = 115.31reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F(1, 51) = 115.31, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(1, 50) = 5.65reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .021

    “F(1, 50) = 5.65, p < .05”

51 of 51

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.

  • Nested group contrasts are not orthogonal

    Minor

    The text calls both sets orthogonal, but the listed nested contrasts overlap: for example, the coefficient vectors for predictions (3a) and (3c) have a nonzero dot product.

  • Reported age range conflicts with subgroup ranges

    Minor

    The effective sample is reported as ranging from 8.10 to 11.10 years, but Table 1 includes a child aged 8.08 years and lists no subgroup maximum above 11.08 years.

  • Digit Span ANOVA degrees of freedom conflict with sample sizes

    Minor

    The four reported Digit Backward Span group sizes total 53. A two-way ANOVA with four between-subject groups would have 49 residual degrees of freedom, rather than the reported 50.

  • Training-type contrast repeats the single-LM group

    Minor

    Prediction (4) names the single-LM group twice as the comparator, whereas its coefficients assign negative weights to both single-task groups. The contrast as written therefore does not match the stated training-type comparison.

4 of 4

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Bandura, 1997, Self-Efficacy: The Exercice of Control
  2. Dovis, 2012, Can motivation normalize working memory and task persistence in children with attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder? The effects of money and computer-gaming, J. Abnorm. Child. Psychol, 40, 669, 10.1007/s10802-011-9601-8 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Green, 2006, The cognitive neuroscience of video games, 211
  4. Klauer, 2001, Handbuch Kognitives Training
  5. Lehrl, 1977, MWT-B: Mehrfach-Wahl-Wortschatz-Test B
  6. Wechsler, 1955, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Dörrenbächer, S., Müller, P. M., Tröger, J., & Kray, J.
Affiliations
Saarland University (DE)
ORCID
Kray, Jutta
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2014-11-13
Volume
5
Pages
1275-1275
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01275
PMC
PMC4230167
OpenAlex
W2139303129
Semantic Scholar
7da265c035654fb37e56ee50fa01a7a01538ba50
Cited by
59
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 2
FWCI
10.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (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
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Grant DFG-IRTG-1457, DFG-IRTG-1457, IRTG 1457)
  • Universität des Saarlandes
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
game elements, cognitive control, middle childhood, training motivation, intrinsic interest, near transfer, far transfer, response speed

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