Does working memory training promote the use of strategies on untrained working memory tasks?
Open accessAbstract
Adaptive computerized training has been associated with significant enhancements in untrained working memory tasks, but the nature of the cognitive changes that underpin these improvements are not yet fully understood. Here, we investigate the possibility that training stimulates the use of memory-related strategies. In a randomized controlled trial, participants completed four tests of working memory before receiving adaptive working memory training, nonadaptive working memory training with low memory loads, or no training. Open-ended interviews about strategy use were conducted after the administration of untrained working memory tasks at two time points. Those in the adaptive and nonadaptive groups completed the assessments before (T1) and after (T2) 10 training sessions. The no-training group completed the same set of tasks at T1 and T2, without any training between assessment points. Adaptive training was associated with selective improvements in untrained tests of working memory, accompanied by a significant increase in the use of a grouping strategy for visuospatial short-term memory and verbal working memory tasks. These results indicate that training-related improvements in working memory may be mediated by implicit and spontaneous changes in the use of strategies to subsegment sequences of information into groups for recall when the tasks used at test overlap with those used during training.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
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?
Task- or stimulus-specific strategies probably explain much of the pretest-to-posttest improvement for intermediate and near transfer to verbal and visuospatial working memory tasks.
“For intermediate and near transfer effects to verbal and visuo-spatial working memory tasks, the development of task- or stimulus-specific strategies is likely to explain a large amount of the pretest-to-posttest improvement (Gibson et al., 2014; Dunning & Holmes, 2014; Sprenger et al., 2013).”
From Working Memory Training Does Not Improve Performance on Measures of Intelligence or Other Measures of “Far Transfer” (2016) · cites this paper as Dunning & Holmes, 2014
The Discussion reports that strategy use and performance improved together on untrained visuospatial short-term memory and verbal working memory tasks that directly overlapped with training, and proposes task-specific strategies as an explanation. It does not establish how much of the improvement strategies explain, and the Results do not show a comparable strategy increase for visuospatial working memory in the adaptive-training group. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredDunning and Holmes found that in an adaptive WM training RCT, self-reported grouping strategy use at posttest increased for the adaptive training group compared to active and passive controls on all but one test, and increases in performance gains and grouping strategy use co-occurred on two tasks sharing structure and materials with Cogmed.
“On all but one test, a significant increase in the self-reported use of a grouping strategy at posttest was observed for the adaptive training group as compared to active and passive controls. Increases in performance gains and grouping strategy use co-occurred on two of the four pre-post tasks. These two tasks shared both the task structure and stimulus materials with the Cogmed program used for”
From The early effects of external and internal strategies on working memory updating training (2018) · cites this paper as [9]
Use of internally generated strategies as measured by self-reports has been found to be related to better complex span performance in several studies.
“Besides practice with an externally provided strategy, also the use of internally generated strategies as measured by self-reports has been found to be related to better complex span performance in several studies9,10,14–16.”
From The early effects of external and internal strategies on working memory updating training (2018) · cites this paper as [9]
The present results using the n-back paradigm align well with previous findings that explicit WM strategy instruction can be effective and that self-generated WM strategies are associated with higher task performance.
“The present results using the n-back paradigm align well with previous findings mainly from complex span studies that have indicated that explicit WM strategy instruction can be effective10–13, and that self-generated WM strategies are associated with higher task performance9,10,14–16.”
From The early effects of external and internal strategies on working memory updating training (2018) · cites this paper as [9]
This training study provides further support for the strategy mediation theory of working memory improvement compared with the capacity theory.
“This training study provides further support for the strategy mediation theory of WM improvement (Dunning & Holmes, 2014; Peng & Fuchs, 2017), compared with the capacity theory (Engle & Kane, 2003).”
From Training-induced improvement in working memory tasks results from switching to efficient strategies (2021) · cites this paper as Dunning & Holmes, 2014
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 59 · Cited by 129
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Alloway, T. P. (2007). Automated working memory assessment. Pearson Assessment.
- Cogmed. (2005). Cogmed working memory training. Pearson Assessment.
- Authors
- Dunning, D. L., & Holmes, J.
- Affiliations
- University of East Anglia (GB)
- MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Dunning, Darren L.
- Venue
- Memory & Cognition
- Published
- 2014-04-19
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 854-862
- ISSN
- 0090-502X (ISSN-L)
- 1532-5946
- PMC
- PMC4110412
- OpenAlex
- W2011576342
- Cited by
- 129
- References
- 59
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 7
- FWCI
- 16.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Memory & Cognition (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
- Keywords
- working memory training, adaptive training, transfer of training, memory strategies, grouping strategies, visuospatial short-term memory, verbal working memory, strategy use, implicit learning
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Mental Recall, Young Adult
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
