The DOI matches its Crossref record; 71 of the 73 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 6 of the 28 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis
Open accessAbstract
Working memory (WM), the ability to store and manipulate information for short periods of time, is an important predictor of scholastic aptitude and a critical bottleneck underlying higher-order cognitive processes, including controlled attention and reasoning. Recent interventions targeting WM have suggested plasticity of the WM system by demonstrating improvements in both trained and untrained WM tasks. However, evidence on transfer of improved WM into more general cognitive domains such as fluid intelligence (Gf) has been more equivocal. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis focusing on one specific training program, n-back. We searched PubMed and Google Scholar for all n-back training studies with Gf outcome measures, a control group, and healthy participants between 18 and 50 years of age. In total, we included 20 studies in our analyses that met our criteria and found a small but significant positive effect of n-back training on improving Gf. Several factors that moderate this transfer are identified and discussed. We conclude that short-term cognitive training on the order of weeks can result in beneficial effects in important cognitive functions as measured by laboratory tests.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
37 Own result · 15 Own interpretation · 13 No full text of the sources · 5 Own method · 2 Partly supported · 2 No basis given · 1 Supported · 1 Supported so far · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“On theoretical grounds, the observed improvements are plausible, since Gf and n-back performance draw upon overlapping cognitive and neural processes, including shared demands on WM and interference resolution (Burgess et al., 2011;Buschkuehl, Hernandez-Garcia, Jaeggi, Bernard, & Jonides, 2014;von Bastian & Oberauer, 2013).”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Conclusions
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Burgess et al., 2011 source
The Introduction (page unavailable) describes the n-back task as involving working-memory updating and interference control, and reports links between fluid intelligence, n-back lure accuracy, and activity in frontal and parietal regions. The Discussion (page unavailable) concludes that neural interference-control mechanisms account for some, though not all, of the relationship between fluid intelligence and working-memory span. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Partly supportedcites Buschkuehl, Hernandez-Garcia, Jaeggi, Bernard, & Jonides, 2014 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (page unavailable) proposes that n-back and reasoning tasks may engage overlapping brain regions and psychological processes. The paper also identifies working memory as relevant to both in its introductory text, but it does not establish a shared interference-resolution demand; the only retrieved mention of interference control is in a reference title. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not matchedcites von Bastian & Oberauer, 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although none of our analyzed parameters (session length, number of sessions, starting nback level, and rate of improvement) reached significance in our main regression analyses”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although our meta-analysis did reveal significantly greater transfer in studies that used passive controls”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Classic fail-safe N calculation: The observed studies, with weighted g = 0.24, led to a combined weighted ES of g = 5.78.Adding the 59 null effect studies would increase the sample size to n = 83.Average ES in the new sample would be: 5:78 83 ¼ :069 .”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Conclusions
plaindirectn = 83- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Additionally, we found no difference depending on whether studies used dual or single n-back, which corroborates previous findings (Jaeggi et al., 2014;Jaeggi et al., 2010).”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Subgroup analyses
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, there was no difference in ES between research conducted by the present study authors, S.M.J. and M.B. and research conducted by other groups (Table 1).”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, there was no difference in the performance of either type of control group when compared directly with each other (Ctrl ES; p = .2)”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Subgroup analyses
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The most striking moderator of the observed transfer effect is geographic region.International studies tend to find more transfer than U.S. studies.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“but there was significant improvement in the performance of treatment groups (Tx ES; p = .04)within those studies that also use passive controls.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Subgroup analyses
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finally, there was no statistical difference in ES between the 7 studies involving study authors S.J.M. and M.B. and the 13 studies that did not.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Subgroup analyses
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 28
- Probably not a substantial claim. 17
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“However, evidence on transfer of improved WM into more general cognitive domains such as fluid intelligence (Gf) has been more equivocal.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“Despite many promising studies (e.g., Jaeggi, Buschkuehl, Jonides, & Perrig, 2008;Rudebeck, Bor, Ormond, O'Reilly, & Lee, 2012;Stephenson & Halpern, 2013), the aforementioned quote reflects results from other well-controlled, rigorous attempts at replication that have failed to find transfer (Redick et al., 2013;Thompson et al., 2013).”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Redick et al., 2013 source
- Supportedcites Thompson et al., 2013 source
The Introduction reports both studies finding gains in fluid intelligence after working-memory training and studies finding no such gains. The Discussion (Implications for Working Memory Training) adds that three published replication attempts, including this study, failed to find transfer. Together, these passages support describing the evidence as equivocal. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“neuroimaging evidence has demonstrated functional overlap in the lateral prefrontal and parietal cortices, implicating shared neural resources that underlie both constructs (Burgess, Gray, Conway, & Braver, 2011).”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Burgess, Gray, Conway, & Braver, 2011 source
The Introduction’s “Common neural substrates” section identifies prefrontal and parietal regions as related to both fluid intelligence and working-memory span. The Abstract also reports that activity in dorsolateral prefrontal and parietal cortex correlated with both measures, supporting the claim of overlapping neural resources. Page numbers were not provided in the copy. (LLM, conf=0.93)
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Furthermore, we have previously described a dose-dependent relationship between training and transfer, such that more training leads to more gain (Jaeggi et al., 2008).”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“This relationship has been replicated in some studies (Basak, Boot, Voss, & Kramer, 2008;Dahlin, Backman, Neely, & Nyberg, 2009;Stepankova et al., 2014;Tomic & Klauer, 1996), but not others (Redick et al., 2013).”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Jaeggi et al., 2008 source
The Results report that transfer to fluid intelligence varied with training time (8, 12, 17, or 19 days). The Discussion explicitly calls the gain dose-responsive and says its amount depends on training time, supporting the statement attached to this citation. The verbatim citing sentence does not attribute the separate claim about replications in other studies to this paper. (LLM, conf=0.94)
- Partly supportedcites Basak, Boot, Voss, & Kramer, 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The General Discussion reports that transfer benefits were mostly observed after 23.5 hours of video-game training, while about half that time was not enough. This supports a relationship between training time and transfer in this study, but the paper does not establish that the relationship was replicated in some studies but not others. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Redick et al., 2013 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although we did find a negative correlation, the effect lost significance (from p = .05to p = .22)after trimming outliers (SOM, Table S1).Nevertheless, the slope of the effect (-.07) remained the same”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In total, we included 20 studies in our analyses that met our criteria”
- Also stated in: § Study selection · plain
“In the end, 20 studies remained in the final meta-analysis (Fig. 2).”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Also stated in: § Study selection · plain
In the paper
“Egger's regression (Egger, Davey Smith, Schneider, & Minder, 1997), which is based on the association between standard error and ES, revealed no relationship (p = .68).”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Description of studies
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Egger, Davey Smith, Schneider, & Minder, 1997 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Passive control groups were mostly enrolled in international studies (10/12), as compared with active control groups (3/12)”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Both individually appeared to contribute toward the effect observed in passive controls and, together, reduced the ES gain caused by the condition of having a passive control from .31 to .09,rendering the p-value nonsignificant.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Regression analyses
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: For the posttest effect size calculation, the authors assumed that treatment and control groups did not differ at pretest.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First is that these results are based on a restricted range of the general population: healthy, young adults between 18 and 50 years of age who were largely at the peak of cognitive functioning.Within this restricted range of young adults, the majority of participants were college undergraduates, thereby skewing our samples even younger (mean age ± SD: 22.85 ± 2.60).”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Some heterogeneity (I 2 = 27.88%,p = .08)was found in Tx ES, which only looked at improvements within the treatment groups, but this heterogeneity was largely controlled out in Post ES (I 2 = 6.92%, p = .37),which directly compares treatment to control groups at posttest.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Description of studies
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In total, we analyzed data from 98 Gf outcome measures among 559 n-back trained participants and 463 controls.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Description of studies
plainn = 559- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No other predictors reached significance, but session length (p = .06,b = -.03) and starting n-back level (p = .06,b = -.33) both correlated marginally and negatively with Post ES when outliers were removed (SOM, Table S1).”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Regression analyses
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: For the posttest effect size calculation, the authors assumed that treatment and control groups did not differ at pretest.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the effect lost significance when outliers were trimmed (p = .22,b = -.07;SOM, Table S1), although the slope remains the same.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Regression analyses
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: For the posttest effect size calculation, the authors assumed that treatment and control groups did not differ at pretest.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The treatment/control group difference in Gf at posttest (g = 0.24, SE = 0.07) is significantly greater than the treatment/control group difference at baseline (g = -0.003,SE = 0.08; group difference: p = .03).”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Overall effect size
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: For the posttest effect size calculation, the authors assumed that treatment and control groups did not differ at pretest.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Transfer seemed to occur equally to both verbal and visual Gf tasks, although there were only a minority of studies that employed any form of verbal reasoning (n = 5), making this finding preliminary.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Subgroup analyses
hedgedn = 5- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Importantly, the shortest session length in our sample was only 18.5 min”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With a baseline ES of essentially 0, we conclude that no preexisting differences are present at the group level between treatment and control groups.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Overall effect size
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“large improvements were found in Tx ES (Table 1), which is calculated independently of the control group.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“international (outside the U.S.) studies demonstrated an average ES of .44 (SE = .10),while U.S. studies only averaged .06(SE = .09).The difference is significant at the p < .01level.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Subgroup analyses
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: For the posttest effect size calculation, the authors assumed that treatment and control groups did not differ at pretest.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our regression analysis equivocally supports this hypothesis.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The 20 studies included here were all completed between 2008 and 2013.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Description of studies
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, studies that used passive controls demonstrated more net transfer (g = 0.44, SE = .10)than those with active controls (g = 0.06, SE = .09),a difference that is also statistically significant at p < .01.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Subgroup analyses
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: For the posttest effect size calculation, the authors assumed that treatment and control groups did not differ at pretest.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the SOM contains alternate regression models with trimmed outliers that revealed marginally significant negative trends between Gf transfer and both starting n-back level (p = .06)and session length (p = .06;Table S1).”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These factors, individually and together, account for a sizable portion of the passive control effect and reduce its estimated effect to the point of statistical insignificance (Table 3).”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“suggesting cultural differences in attrition that may be reflective of issues surrounding general compliance and investment in research.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“even small improvements can have profound societal ramifications”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Conclusions
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: Fluid intelligence is a fundamental cognitive ability that underpins many life functions.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These effects may contribute to differences not only between international and U.S. research participants, but also between methodological practices of researchers.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A note of caution is warranted here regarding these regression results: given the heavy influence of outliers (SOM, Table S1) and the relatively small sample sizes, these results should be viewed as preliminary”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“so it is not clear what would happen below this data range.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The former suggests that those who start with more room to improve (i.e., lower n-back level on day 1) may also gain the most.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“There is a substantial body of literature available on the effects of culture on cognition (cf.Muggleton & Banissy, 2014).”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Muggleton & Banissy, 2014 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, while the precise nature of the effects of remuneration for n-back training are still unclear”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“While this does control for important test-retest practice effects, it does not control for potential motivational or Hawthorne effects associated with being enrolled in an intervention study (Shipstead, Redick, & Engle, 2012).”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Shipstead, Redick, & Engle, 2012 source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, due to the plurality of cultures (mostly European and American) represented in our meta-analysis, the precise reasons for the observed regional differences are not immediately clear.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Percent agreement on the coding (interrater reliability) was high (94.14%),with κ = 0.88 (SE = 0.03) using a conservative expected agreement estimate of 50% (i.e., match or no match).”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Coding
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“thereby suggesting that the transfer of n-back training may not be restricted to matrix reasoning tests (Shipstead et al., 2012) but, rather, may reflect a more global improvement in Gf.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Subgroup analyses
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Shipstead et al., 2012 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“thereby ruling out preexisting differences between cultures or differences in participant characteristics due to the highly selective universities in which certain U.S. studies were conducted.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“It is important to note, however, that their active control groups did not improve over baseline, nor did they outperform their associated passive control groups, suggesting that the failure to find transfer was irrespective of control type.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Abstract
What the sources say
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“this meta-analysis of 20 different studies, 30 different treatment groups, and 24 different control groups, with data collected from 98 different Gf outcome measures, is a first step toward providing this extraordinary evidence.”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Moreover, the effects of rewards and compensation on performance have an extensive body of literature behind them, which at times can also show mixed results (Cameron, Banko, & Pierce, 2001).”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Cameron, Banko, & Pierce, 2001 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The authors state this as an assumption.
For the posttest effect size calculation, the authors assumed that treatment and control groups did not differ at pretest.
“under the assumption that no group differences existed at pretest.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Fluid intelligence is a fundamental cognitive ability that underpins many life functions.
“Since Gf is a fundamental cognitive skill that underlies a wide range of life functions”
The paper relies on this without support.
The healthy young adults in the meta-analysis are representative of society's workforce.
“particularly given the healthy young adults in our analyses, representative of society's workforce.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Prior claims about n-back training's effect on fluid intelligence are usually based on single studies with methodological limitations.
“Although claims to date are ordinarily based on single studies, each with various methodological limitations”
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 cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“For example, the meta-analysis of Au et al. [16] reported a small, but significant positive transfer effect on fluid intelligence in healthy young adults.”
From Adaptive working memory training does not produce transfer effects in cognition and neuroimaging (2022) · cites this paper as [16]
In the citing paper
“Cognitive training has shown to have an impact on task performance and on fluid intelligence (Gf) tests [13-15].”
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.
- Consistentt(34) = 2reported p = .05 · recomputed p = .054
“t(34) = 2.0, p = .05”
- Consistentt(14) = 2.23reported p = .04 · recomputed p = .043
“t(14) = 2.23, p = .04”
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.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Conclusions
“| Active Control | 12 | .06 (.09) | .01* | 13 | .25 (.10) | .04* | 12 | .08 (.10) | .20 | | Passive Control | 12 | .44 (.10) | | 17 | .54 (.90) | | 12 | .28 (.10) | |”
§ Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis > Subgroup analyses
“there was significant improvement in the performance of treatment groups (Tx ES; p = .04)within those studies that also use passive controls.”
Citations
Cites
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 · Cited by 63,139
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629 · Cited by 56,722
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009) · doi:10.1002/9780470743386 · Cited by 14,225
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021) · doi:10.1002/9781119558378 · Cited by 9,799
Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.627 · Cited by 7,176 · cited 1×
“This idea is based on a broader literature demonstrating negative effects of extrinsic rewards (e.g., money) on intrinsic motivation (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999).”
(2005) · PubMed · Cited by 7,011
Grit: perseverance and passion for long-term goals
Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.1087 · Cited by 6,911
Effect size estimates: Current use, calculations, and interpretation.
Fritz, C. O., Morris, P. E., & Richler, J. J. (2012) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/a0024338 · Cited by 5,199 · cited 1×
“A common property of statistics holds that sampling from restricted ranges of the total population usually biases ES downward, due to reduced variability (Bobko, Roth, & Bobko, 2001; Fritz, Morris, & Richler, 2012).”
Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research
Rosenthal, R. (1991) · doi:10.4135/9781412984997 · Cited by 4,635
Meta-Analytic Procedures for Social Research.
Metcalfe, A., & Rosenthal, R. (1994) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series D (The Statistician) · doi:10.2307/2348600 · Cited by 4,249
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Borenstein, M., Higgins, J., & Rothstein, H. (2005). Comprehensive meta-analysis version 2. Englewood: Biostat.
- Dunst, C. J., Hamby, D. W., & Trivette, C. M. (2004). Guidelines for Calculating Effect Sizes for Practice-Based Research Syntheses. Centerscope, 3(1), 1–10.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–300 of 658
(Un)Great Expectations: The Role of Placebo Effects in Cognitive Training
Tsai, N., Buschkuehl, M., Kamarsu, S., Shah, P., Jonides, J., & Jaeggi, S. M. (2018) · Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.jarmac.2018.06.001 · Cited by 44
“For training, we chose a task that is one of the most commonly used tasks in cognitive intervention research, namely, the n-back task, which has also shown promise in terms of producing generalizing effects (Weicker et al., 2016; Au et al., 2015).”
MethodSelf-citationClark, C. M., Lawlor‐Savage, L., & Goghari, V. M. (2017) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0177707 · Cited by 34
Cattoni, A., Anderle, F., Venuti, P., & Pasqualotto, A. (2024) · International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1016/j.ijcci.2024.100633 · Cited by 58
Cognitive consequences of playing brain‐training games in immersive virtual reality
Parong, J. A., & Mayer, R. E. (2019) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.3582 · Cited by 32
Effects of Performance and Task Duration on Mental Workload during Working Memory Task
Khaksari, K., Condy, E. E., Millerhagen, J., Anderson, A. A., Dashtestani, H., & Gandjbakhche, A. (2019) · Photonics · doi:10.3390/photonics6030094 · Cited by 28
“N-back performance is also potentially trainable, such that repeated exposure to the task increases performance [37].”
BackgroundOphey, A., Roheger, M., Folkerts, A., Skoetz, N., & Kalbe, E. (2020) · Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2020.575804 · Cited by 35
“, 2018) implies that working memory improvements after targeted working memory training (WMT) might naturally lead to positive transfer effects to other cognitive functions and even fluid intelligence (Au et al., 2015).”
BackgroundPanesi, S., Bandettini, A., Traverso, L., & Morra, S. (2022) · Journal of Intelligence · doi:10.3390/jintelligence10010005 · Cited by 35
Colom, R., Hua, X., Martínez, K., Burgaleta, M., Román, F. J., Gunter, J. L., Carmona, S., Jaeggi, S. M., & Thompson, P. M. (2016) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.07.034 · Cited by 29
“It must be also noted that previous research has shown that cognitive training regimes based on the n-back task are associated with transfer effects (Au et al., 2014).”
ResultSelf-citationMaintenance effects of working memory intervention (Cogmed) in children with symptomatic epilepsy
Fuentes, A., & Kerr, E. N. (2017) · Epilepsy & Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.yebeh.2016.12.016 · Cited by 28
“This measure was included based on previous research documenting improvements in fluid reasoning following WM training at long-term follow-up [51].”
Training-induced improvement in working memory tasks results from switching to efficient strategies
Malinovitch, T., Jakoby, H., & Ahissar, M. (2021) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-020-01824-6 · Cited by 29
Zheng, J., Ma, Q., He, W., Huang, Y., Shi, P. A., Li, S., & Yu, H. (2023) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2023.1089276 · Cited by 29
Rizkalla, M. N. (2015) · Aging & Mental Health · doi:10.1080/13607863.2015.1118679 · Cited by 28
“Dysfunction in fluid intelligence is intimately associated with normal aging and may supersede other personal characteristics in accounting for age-related cognitive deficits (Au et al., 2015).”
BackgroundThe Learning Hippocampus: Education and Experience‐Dependent Plasticity
Wenger, E., & Lövdén, M. (2016) · Mind Brain and Education · doi:10.1111/mbe.12112 · Cited by 31
Successful aging: The role of cognitive gerontology
Hartley, A. A., Angel, L., Castel, A. D., Didierjean, A., Geraci, L. D., Hartley, J. T., Hazeltine, E., Lemaire, P., Maquestiaux, F., Ruthruff, E. D., et al. (2017) · Experimental Aging Research · doi:10.1080/0361073x.2017.1398849 · Cited by 32
Spatial Ability and Theory of Mind: A Mediating Role of Visual Perspective Taking
Tian, M., Luo, T., Ding, J., Wang, X., & Cheung, H. (2021) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/cdev.13546 · Cited by 28
Transfer of working memory training to the inhibitory control of auditory distraction
Kattner, F. (2021) · Psychological Research · doi:10.1007/s00426-020-01468-0 · Cited by 29
Overlapping and dissociable brain activations for fluid intelligence and executive functions
Santarnecchi, E., Momi, D., Mencarelli, L., Plessow, F., Saxena, S., Rossi, S., Rossi, A., Mathan, S. A., & Pascual‐Leone, Á. (2021) · Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3758/s13415-021-00870-4 · Cited by 29
“Of these core EFs, the vast majority of studies has focused on training updating ability (Baltes et al., 1989; Harrison et al., 2013; Jaeggi et al., 2008; Jaeggi et al., 2011) (for a review see: Au et al., 2015) with the goal of inducing a positive transfer to gf.”
BackgroundTask-Switching Training and Transfer
Gaál, Z. A., & Czigler, I. (2017) · Journal of Psychophysiology · doi:10.1027/0269-8803/a000189 · Cited by 29
Predictors of Effective Working Memory Training in Individuals with Alcohol Use Disorders
Gunn, R. L., Gerst, K. R., Wiemers, E. A., Redick, T. S., & Finn, P. (2018) · Alcoholism Clinical and Experimental Research · doi:10.1111/acer.13892 · Cited by 29
“, as may be expected in clinical populations such as those with an AUD) may leave more “room to improve” on WM capacity (Au et al., 2015).”
Science Education and Visuospatial Processing
Castro-Alonso, J. C., & Uttal, D. H. (2019) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-20969-8_3 · Cited by 28
Cognitive Training: Transfer Beyond the Laboratory?
Lintern, G., & Boot, W. R. (2019) · Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720819879814 · Cited by 28
Stojanoski, B. B., Wild, C. J., Battista, M. E., Nichols, E. S., & Owen, A. M. (2020) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/xge0000773 · Cited by 24
“…most robust effects in the literature—have been equivocal, with some claiming that brain training improves global cognition (Au, Buschkuehl, Duncan, & Jaeggi, 2016; Au et al., 2015 ) and others concluding that it does not produce transferable gains (MelbyLervåg & Hulme, 2016; Redick et al., 2013).”
BackgroundThe role of proactive interference in working memory training and transfer
Redick, T. S., Wiemers, E. A., & Engle, R. W. (2019) · Psychological Research · doi:10.1007/s00426-019-01172-8 · Cited by 30
A Meta-analysis of augmented reality programs for education and training
Howard, M. C., & Davis, M. M. (2023) · Virtual Reality · doi:10.1007/s10055-023-00844-6 · Cited by 44
“Despite these benefits, mental abilities are notoriously difficult to develop, and it is challenging for any education or training method to produce substantial benefits beyond other methods (Au et al. 2015; Harrison et al. 2013).”
BackgroundCognitive Training: How Evidence, Controversies, and Challenges Inform Education Policy
Green, C. S., & Newcombe, N. S. (2020) · Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1177/2372732219870202 · Cited by 26
“For example, a recent meta-analysis focused on the impact of training on one particular working memory task, the N-back task, on one cognitive ability, fluid intelligence (Au et al., 2015).”
BackgroundCan Machine Learning Approaches Lead Toward Personalized Cognitive Training?
Shani, R., Tal, S., Zilcha‐Mano, S., & Okon‐Singer, H. (2019) · Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2019.00064 · Cited by 29
Studying the Mental Effort in Virtual Versus Real Environments
Luong, T., Martin, N., Argelaguet, F., & Lécuyer, A. (2019) · IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR) · doi:10.1109/vr.2019.8798029 · Cited by 24
“An auditory N-back letter task was chosen to induce different levels of mental workload [1].”
InfluentialEditorial Special Topic: Enhancing Brain and Cognition Through Cognitive Training
Jaeggi, S. M., Karbach, J., & Strobach, T. (2017) · Journal of Cognitive Enhancement · doi:10.1007/s41465-017-0057-9 · Cited by 26
Self-citationLebedev, A. V., Nilsson, J., & Lövdén, M. (2018) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn_a_01260 · Cited by 21
“at all (Melby-Lervag, Redick, & Hulme, 2016) or, at best, small effects (Au et al., 2015) on reasoning.”
BackgroundJacoby, N., & Ahissar, M. (2015) · Journal of Vision · doi:10.1167/15.10.6 · Cited by 28
“This same meta-analysis of WM training studies (Au et al., 2014) identified a key difference between the transfer reported by studies that only had a passive control and studies that had an active control; namely, the former reported a significantly larger transfer than the latter (detailed in…”
ResultInfluentialPeng, J., Mo, L., Huang, P., & Zhou, Y. (2017) · Cognitive Development · doi:10.1016/j.cogdev.2017.05.006 · Cited by 29
Assessing the Impact of Expectations in Cognitive Training and Beyond
Denkinger, S., Spano, L. P., Bingel, U., Witt, C. M., Bavelier, D., & Green, C. S. (2021) · Journal of Cognitive Enhancement · doi:10.1007/s41465-021-00206-7 · Cited by 26
Cubillo, A., Hermes, H., Berger, E., Winkel, K., Schunk, D., Fehr, E., & Hare, T. A. (2022) · Developmental Science · doi:10.1111/desc.13252 · Cited by 41
Anxiety-reducing effects of working memory training: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Wang, Y., Wen, B., Wei, J., & Hu, S. (2023) · Journal of Affective Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2023.03.045 · Cited by 27
Motter, J., Devanand, D., Doraiswamy, P. M., & Sneed, J. (2016) · Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2016.00249 · Cited by 20
Niklas, F., Cohrssen, C., & Tayler, C. (2018) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.06.001 · Cited by 24
General fluid/inductive reasoning battery for a high-ability population
Kyllonen, P. C., Hartman, R. O., Sprenger, A. M., Weeks, J. P., Bertling, M., McGrew, K. S., Kriz, S., Bertling, J., Fife, J. H., & Stankov, L. (2018) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-018-1098-4 · Cited by 26
Hendershot, C. S., Wardell, J. D., Vandervoort, J., McPhee, M. D., Keough, M. T., & Quilty, L. C. (2018) · Psychology of Addictive Behaviors · doi:10.1037/adb0000415 · Cited by 23
Inhibitory Processes Training for School-age Children: Transfer Effects
Aydmune, Y. S., Introzzi, I. M., & Lipina, S. J. (2019) · Developmental Neuropsychology · doi:10.1080/87565641.2019.1677667 · Cited by 27
“A better functioning of this inhibitory process could imply a decrease in the WM demands when it is released of irrelevant information, contributing to the processing of important information for the activity (Au et al., 2015; Brewin & Beaton, 2002; Dempster & Corkhill, 1999; Hasher et al., 2007; Sala & Gobet, 2017).”
BackgroundThe Effects of Working Memory Training on Brain Activity
Nęcka, E., Gruszka, A., Hampshire, A., Sarzyńska-Wawer, J., Anicai, A.-E., Orzechowski, J., Nowak, M., Wójcik, N., Sandrone, S., & Soreq, E. (2021) · Brain Sciences · doi:10.3390/brainsci11020155 · Cited by 23
“Further research, summarized in a meta-analysis [25] allows for the conclusion that working memory training on the basis of N-back task brings about substantial improvement of general mental ability in healthy adults.”
BackgroundVisuospatial working memory training facilitates visually-aided explicit sequence learning
Chan, J. S. Y., Wu, Q., Liang, D., & Yan, J. H. (2015) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2015.09.008 · Cited by 21
From gifted to high potential and twice exceptional: A state-of-the-art meta-review
Desvaux, T., Danna, J., Velay, J., & Frey, A. (2023) · Applied Neuropsychology Child · doi:10.1080/21622965.2023.2252950 · Cited by 35
“…in different aspects gave rise to a multidirectional conception of intelligence, with aspects such as fluid or crystallized intelligence subsequently shown to have different developmental trajectories (Kent, 2017) with debated influence on each other (Au et al., 2015; Unsworth et al., 2014).”
BackgroundOLIVE, L. S., Telford, R. M., Westrupp, E. M., & Telford, R. D. (2023) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/cdev.14014 · Cited by 33
Hering, A., Meuleman, B., Bürki, C. N., Borella, E., & Kliegel, M. (2017) · Journal of Cognitive Enhancement · doi:10.1007/s41465-017-0041-4 · Cited by 24
Response Time Reduction Due to Retesting in Mental Speed Tests: A Meta-Analysis
Scharfen, J., Blum, D., & Holling, H. (2018) · Journal of Intelligence · doi:10.3390/jintelligence6010006 · Cited by 28
Homer, B. D., Ober, T. M., Rose, M. C., MacNamara, A. P., Mayer, R. E., & Plass, J. L. (2019) · Mind Brain and Education · doi:10.1111/mbe.12189 · Cited by 25
Phonological memory training and its effect on second language vocabulary development
Καρούσου, Α., & Nerantzaki, T. (2020) · Second language Research · doi:10.1177/0267658319898514 · Cited by 23
Reducing the Disruptive Effects of Interruptions With Noninvasive Brain Stimulation
Blumberg, E. J., Foroughi, C. K., Scheldrup, M. R., Peterson, M. S., Boehm-Davis, D., & Parasuraman, R. (2014) · Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720814565189 · Cited by 24
The Flynn Effect: A Quantitative Commentary on Modernity and Human Intelligence
Clark, C. M., Lawlor‐Savage, L., & Goghari, V. M. (2016) · Measurement Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives · doi:10.1080/15366367.2016.1156910 · Cited by 25
“…of “brain training” programs remains controversial and mixed, specific programs that seem to target the updating aspect of working memory (e.g., n-back or dual n-back training games) appear to benefit performance on matrix-based fluid intelligence tasks such as Raven’s matrices (Au et al., 2014).”
BackgroundWhat Is Fluid Intelligence? Can It Be Improved?
Kyllonen, P. C., & Kell, H. J. (2016) · Methodology of educational measurement and assessment · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-43473-5_2 · Cited by 29
“This study has been replicated a number of times and a recent meta-analysis suggested that there was consistent evidence that several weeks of working memory training, specifically based on the n-back task, transfers to fluid ability tasks (Au et al. 2015).”
ResultSalmi, J., Soveri, A., Salmela, V. R., Alho, K., Leppämäki, S., Tani, P., Koski, A., Jaeggi, S. M., & Laine, M. (2020) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.25164 · Cited by 24
“, 2019), cognitive training (Au et al., 2015; Soveri et al., 2017b), as well as ADHD studies (see below) is the nback task originally developed by Kirchner (1958).”
BackgroundSelf-citationCan we enhance working memory? Bias and effectiveness in cognitive training studies
Rodas, J. A., Asimakopoulou, A. A., & Greene, C. M. (2024) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-024-02466-8 · Cited by 28
“However, in a meta-analysis by Melby-Lervåg and Hulme (2016) in which data from two of these meta-analyses (i.e., Au et al., 2015; Karbach & Verhaeghen, 2014) were reanalyzed, it was argued that the significant results reported were obtained using biased methodologies.”
BackgroundInfluentialZając-Lamparska, L., & Trempała, J. (2016) · Health Psychology Report · doi:10.5114/hpr.2016.56846 · Cited by 27
“…the phenomenon of far transfer through training of basic cognitive processes and the mechanism of functional overlap of these processes is concerned with the possibility of improving fluid intelligence (Gf) (Jaeggi et al., 2008; Sternberg, 2008; Shipstead, Redick, & Engle, 2012; Au et al., 2015).”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluentialTräff, U., Olsson, L., Skagerlund, K., Skagenholt, M., & Östergren, R. (2019) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01929 · Cited by 25
Autonomic/central coupling benefits working memory in healthy young adults
Chen, P., Whitehurst, L. N., Naji, M., & Mednick, S. C. (2020) · Neurobiology of Learning and Memory · doi:10.1016/j.nlm.2020.107267 · Cited by 26
Individual Differences in Cognitive Training Research
Katz, B., Jones, M. R., Shah, P., Buschkuehl, M., & Jaeggi, S. M. (2020) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-39292-5_8 · Cited by 33
Self-citationZheng, Q., Cheng, Y. Y., Sonuga-Barke, E. J. S., & Shum, K. K. (2022) · Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology · doi:10.1007/s10802-022-00937-x · Cited by 29
“By contrast, interventions on working memory have yielded mixed results (Au et al., 2014; Klingberg et al., 2002; Shipstead et al., 2012; Melby-Lervåg & Hulme, 2016), which calls into question the changeability of working memory.”
ResultLearningRx Cognitive Training Effects in Children Ages 8–14: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Carpenter, D. M., Ledbetter, C. R., & Moore, A. L. (2016) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.3257 · Cited by 22
“One found significant treatment group gains regardless of the type of control group (Au et al., 2015), and the second also found that the type of control group did not have a significant influence on training effects (Peng & Miller, 2016).”
BackgroundWeicker, J., Hudl, N., Frisch, S., Lepsien, J., Mueller, K., Villringer, A., & Thöne-Otto, A. I. T. (2018) · Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2018.00247 · Cited by 23
Dual n-back working memory training evinces superior transfer effects compared to the method of loci
Li, W., Zhang, Q., Qiao, H., Jin, D., Ngetich, R. K., Zhang, J., Jin, Z., & Li, L. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-82663-w · Cited by 21
Masurovsky, A. (2020) · JMIR Serious Games · doi:10.2196/14030 · Cited by 21
“Foroughi et al [15] checked recruitment methods for studies in a meta-analysis by another author [31] and found that 17 of the 19 studies had used overt recruitment methods.”
MethodAttention Networks in ADHD Adults after Working Memory Training with a Dual n-Back Task
Dotare, M., Bader, M., Mesrobian, S. K., Asai, Y., Villa, A. E. P., & Lintas, A. (2020) · Brain Sciences · doi:10.3390/brainsci10100715 · Cited by 21
“DNBT received notable attention for its potential to improve WM and other aspects of cognitive performance [42,43].”
BackgroundEnvironmental influences on development of executive functions in dogs
Foraita, M., Howell, T. J., & Bennett, P. C. (2021) · Animal Cognition · doi:10.1007/s10071-021-01489-1 · Cited by 27
No Evidence for Expectation Effects in Cognitive Training Tasks
Vodyanyk, M. M., Cochrane, A., Corriveau, A., Demko, Z., & Green, C. S. (2021) · Journal of Cognitive Enhancement · doi:10.1007/s41465-021-00207-6 · Cited by 21
FISHERMAN: A Serious Game for Executive Function Assessment of Older Adults
Wang, P., Fang, Y., Qi, J.-Y., & Li, H. (2022) · Assessment · doi:10.1177/10731911221105648 · Cited by 23
“However, such approaches typically use the same tasks to continuously train the participants, lack relevant feedback and rewards, make the training processes boring, and reduce the training effects (Au et al., 2015; van de Weijer et al., 2019).”
BackgroundMakin, S. J. (2016) · Nature · doi:10.1038/531s10a · Cited by 21
Item strength affects working memory capacity
Shen, Z., Popov, V., Delahay, A. B., & Reder, L. M. (2017) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/s13421-017-0758-4 · Cited by 21
“For example, individual differences inWMcapacity and experimental manipulations of WM demands correlate strongly with laboratory measures of problem-solving (Beilock, Kulp, Holt, & Carr, 2004; Daily, Lovett & Reder, 2001; Hitch, 1978; Hitch & McAuley, 1991; Lovett, Reder & Lebiere, 1999; Passolunghi & Siegel, 2001; fo…”
A feasibility trial of Cogmed working memory training in fragile X syndrome
Berkowitz-Sutherland, L., Schneider, A., Schweitzer, J. B., Hessl, D. R., Hagerman, R. J., & Au, J. (2015) · Journal of Pediatric Genetics · doi:10.3233/pge-14098 · Cited by 22
“areas of daily living as academic success, and fluid intelligence [20, 21].”
BackgroundSelf-citationColom, R., Martínez, K., Burgaleta, M., Román, F. J., García‐García, D., Gunter, J. L., Hua, X., Jaeggi, S. M., & Thompson, P. M. (2016) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.03.087 · Cited by 21
Self-citationThe Impact of Working Memory Training on Children’s Cognitive and Noncognitive SkillsPreprint
Berger, E., Fehr, E., Hermes, H., Schunk, D., & Winkel, K. (2020) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3622985 · Cited by 25
“…lacks a conclusive answer, as even meta-analyses and review studies are controversial on this point (Shipstead, Hicks, and Engle 2012; Karbach and Verhaeghen 2014; Au et al. 2015; Melby-Lerv å g, Redick, and Hulme 2016; Aksayli, Sala, and Gobet 2019; Sala et al. 2019; Gobet and Sala 2023).”
Do Board Games Make People Smarter?
Bartolucci, M., Mattioli, F., & Batini, F. (2019) · International Journal of Game-Based Learning · doi:10.4018/ijgbl.2019100101 · Cited by 20
Schneider, A. N., Sonderegger, A., Krueger, E., Meteier, Q., Lüthold, P., & Chavaillaz, A. (2021) · Journal of Eye Movement Research · doi:10.16910/jemr.13.5.6 · Cited by 21
“n is a variable that can be adjusted to respectively increase or decrease mental load (Au et al., 2015).”
BackgroundCognitive Training in Later Adulthood
Willis, S. L., & Belleville, S. (2015) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-411469-2.00012-1 · Cited by 23
Zhao, X., Xu, Y., Fu, J., & Maes, J. H. R. (2017) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/s13421-017-0773-5 · Cited by 22
“However, this speculation was contradicted in a later review when controlling for outliers (Au et al., 2015).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialThe effect of cognitive training in older adults: be aware of CRUNCH
Fu, L., Kessels, R. P. C., & Maes, J. H. R. (2020) · Aging Neuropsychology and Cognition · doi:10.1080/13825585.2019.1708251 · Cited by 20
Karbach, J., & Kray, J. (2016) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-42662-4_9 · Cited by 30
Editorial: is Game-Based Math Learning Finally Coming of Age?
Kiili, K. J. M., Devlin, K., & Multisilta, J. (2015) · International Journal of Serious Games · doi:10.17083/ijsg.v2i4.109 · Cited by 20
“ fluid intelligence (Gf) – a complex human ability that allows us to adapt our thinking to a new cognitive problem or situation [14].”
The Benefits of Working Memory Capacity on Attentional Control under Pressure
Luo, X., Zhang, L., & Wang, J. (2017) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01105 · Cited by 21
“And the benefits of training could transfer to other aspects such as fluid intelligence (see Au et al., 2015 for meta analyses) or attentional control (e.g., Klingberg et al., 2005; Brehmer et al., 2011; Borella et al., 2014; see Karbach and Verhaeghen, 2014, for meta analyses on older adults),…”
BackgroundResultMinihan, S., Samimi, Z., & Schweizer, S. (2021) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.brat.2021.103974 · Cited by 22
Daugherty, A. M., Sutton, B. P., Hillman, C. H., Kramer, A. F., Cohen, N. J., & Barbey, A. K. (2019) · Trends in Neuroscience and Education · doi:10.1016/j.tine.2019.100123 · Cited by 23
“The observation of greater individual variability than the magnitude of intervention group differences is in line with the mixed results that are common in the cognitive training and intervention literature [82].”
ResultAutonomic Activity during a Daytime Nap Facilitates Working Memory Improvement
Chen, P., Whitehurst, L. N., Naji, M., & Mednick, S. C. (2020) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn_a_01588 · Cited by 20
The comparative analysis of intelligence.
Flaim, M. E., & Blaisdell, A. P. (2020) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000306 · Cited by 24
“Some common WM tasks are the complex span task, n-back task (Au et al., 2015; Shelton, Elliott, Matthews, Hill, & Gouvier, 2010), and reverse span task (Oberauer, Süß, Schulze, Wilhelm, & Wittmann, 2000).”
BackgroundMethodHippocampal subfields' volumes are more relevant to fluid intelligence than verbal working memory
Zhu, B., Chen, C., Dang, X., Dong, Q., & Lin, C. (2017) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2017.02.003 · Cited by 18
Emch, M., Ripp, I., Wu, Q., Yakushev, I. Y., & Koch, K. (2019) · Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2019.00300 · Cited by 24
The therapeutic potential of working memory training for treating mental disorders
Ansari, S. (2015) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2015.00481 · Cited by 20
“For a meta-analysis of the effects of working memory training which tries to address some of these concerns, see Au et al. (2015).”
BackgroundLanguage Aptitudes in L2 Acquisition
Granena, G. (2019) · The Cambridge Handbook of Language Learning · doi:10.1017/9781108333603.017 · Cited by 2
Karbach, J., & Kray, J. (2020) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-39292-5_14 · Cited by 20
Studer-Luethi, B., Törmänen, M. R. K., Margelisch, K., Hogrefe, A. B., & Perrig, W. J. (2022) · Journal of Cognitive Enhancement · doi:10.1007/s41465-022-00242-x · Cited by 19
“Transfer to intelligence after WM training has been extensively reviewed in the literature, with inconsistent conclusions (Au et al., 2015; Melby-Lervåg et al., 2016).”
BackgroundGuo, A., Yang, W., Yang, X., Lin, J., Li, Z., Ren, Y., Yang, J., & Wu, J. (2023) · Brain Sciences · doi:10.3390/brainsci13070992 · Cited by 16
Fluid reasoning skills at the high school transition predict subsequent dropout
Pagani, L. S., Brière, F. N., & Janosz, M. (2017) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2017.02.006 · Cited by 23
“It is the ability to reason in unfamiliar situationswithout depending on previous knowledge (Au et al., 2015).”
BackgroundEffects of Cogmed working memory training on cognitive performance
Etherton, J. L., Oberle, C. D., Rhoton, J., & Ney, A. (2018) · Psychological Research · doi:10.1007/s00426-018-1012-9 · Cited by 22
“These effect sizes approximately correspond to the lower, middle, and upper ranges of effect sizes reported in meta-analyses of WM training studies (Melby-Lervag & Hulme, 2013; Au et al., 2015).”
Siu, T. S. C., McBride, C. A., Tse, C., Tong, X., & Maurer, U. (2018) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02510 · Cited by 19
Mechanisms of working memory training: Insights from individual differences
Meiran, N., Dreisbach, G., & von Bastian, C. C. (2019) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2019.01.010 · Cited by 18
The effectiveness of computerized cognitive training on working memory in a school setting
Wiest, D. J., Wong, E. H., Bacon, J. M., Rosales, K. P., & Wiest, G. M. (2020) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.3634 · Cited by 19
Tsai, N., Jaeggi, S. M., Eccles, J. S., Atherton, O. E., & Robins, R. W. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01838 · Cited by 21
Self-citationMaruyama, T., Takeuchi, H., Taki, Y., Motoki, K., Jeong, H., Kotozaki, Y., Nakagawa, S., Nouchi, R., Iizuka, K., Yokoyama, R., et al. (2018) · Neural Plasticity · doi:10.1155/2018/6574178 · Cited by 17
“These studies have demonstrated transfer effects of such training on cognitive functions (though, the effect size was shown to be modest through the meta-analyses [7, 8]) and effects of such training on neural systems and have suggested that one condition for the transfer effect to occur is that both training and tran…”
Moore, A. L., Carpenter, D. M., Miller, T. M., & Ledbetter, C. R. (2018) · Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment · doi:10.2147/ndt.s165418 · Cited by 19
“Further, two meta-analyses of cognitive training studies (n=35) revealed no difference in outcomes between types of control groups.(58,59) Therefore, we conclude that expectancy or placebo effects were unlikely in the current study.”
BackgroundVerbal working memory training in older adults: an investigation of dose response
Brum, P. S., Borella, E., Carretti, B., & Yassuda, M. S. (2018) · Aging & Mental Health · doi:10.1080/13607863.2018.1531372 · Cited by 19
“Present findings confirm that the six-session protocol can generate gains in cognitive domains not directly involved in training, in agreement with some earlier studies and meta-analyses (Au et al., 2015; Borella et al., 2017a, 2017b; Carretti, Caldarola, Tencati, & Cornoldi, 2014; Heinzel et al., 2014; Schwaighofer e…”
ResultInfluentialByrne, E. M., Ewbank, M., Gathercole, S. E., & Holmes, J. (2020) · Brain and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2020.105552 · Cited by 18
Multisensory Facilitation of Working Memory Training
Pahor, A., Collins, C., Smith-Peirce, R. N., Moon, A., Stavropoulos, T., Silva, I., Peng, E., Jaeggi, S. M., & Seitz, A. R. (2021) · Journal of Cognitive Enhancement · doi:10.1007/s41465-020-00196-y · Cited by 17
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Au, J., Sheehan, E., Tsai, N., Duncan, G. J., Buschkuehl, M., & Jaeggi, S. M.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Irvine (US)
- MIND Research Institute (US)
- Corresponding author
- Au, Jacky
- Venue
- Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
- Published
- 2014-08-08
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 366-377
- ISSN
- 1069-9384 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-5320
- OpenAlex
- W1985948545
- Semantic Scholar
- 669a9f1a189a86de5adae42b90991148d90e53fc
- Cited by
- 727
- References
- 73
- Citations by year
- 2026: 33 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 66 · 2020: 97 · 2019: 73 · 2018: 78 · 2017: 81 · 2016: 63 · 2015: 47 · 2014: 4
- FWCI
- 7.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- escholarship.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Psychonomic Bulletin & Review (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
- Keywords
- working memory training, fluid intelligence, cognitive training, transfer of training, cognitive plasticity, working memory
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aptitude, Attention, Female, Humans, Intelligence, Learning, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Middle Aged, Practice, Psychological, Transfer, Psychology, Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic, 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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-06, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-06 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
