Cited by 1Cognitive Abilities and TestingNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesCognitive Functions and Memory

Broad and sustained transfer effects of executive n-back working memory training

Cao, Dan-Yi, Zhang, Teng-Nan, Zhang, Yang, Zhang, En, Zhang, Gong-Liang·2026·Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

Abstract

Working memory training (WMT) is one of the most widely studied areas in cognitive training. A central concern in WMT research is the transferability of training effects, which remains a topic of ongoing debate. Recently, an executive n-back paradigm, which increases the manipulation of working memory load, has been proposed as a more suitable approach to assess working memory. In the present study, we examined whether executive n-back training, compared to traditional n-back training, led to broader transfer effects across cognitive tasks. Over six daily sessions, participants completed either the executive n-back task or the traditional n-back task. The findings demonstrated that executive n-back training transferred to the Operation Span task, which also measures working memory but differs structurally from the n-back task, and to the task switching, which assesses cognitive flexibility. Furthermore, these transfer effects persisted even after a 3-month interval. These findings suggest that the executive n-back task is more effective than the traditional n-back task. Moreover, this research sheds light on the potential applications of executive n-back training in enhancing cognitive functions more generally, highlighting its utility in both clinical and educational settings where cognitive flexibility and working memory improvements are critical.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3758/s13423-025-02773-8

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Increasing manipulation complexity, such as in executive n-back tasks, leads to broader transfer outcomes.

    “This finding is also consistent with training findings showing that increasing manipulation complexity, such as in executive n-back tasks, leads to broader transfer outcomes (Cao et al., 2026).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cao, D.-Y., Zhang, T.-N., Zhang, Y., Zhang, E., & Zhang, G.-L.
Affiliations
  • Soochow University (CN)
  • Beijing Normal University (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Zhang, Yang
  • Zhang, En
Venue
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
Published
2026-01
Volume
33
Issue
1
Pages
36-36
ISSN
  • 1069-9384 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-5320
OpenAlex
W7118220017
Cited by
0
References
46
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychonomic Bulletin & Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Social Science Fund of China (BBA220201)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
working memory training, n-back task, transfer effects, cognitive flexibility, task switching, operation span, working memory load, cognitive training
MeSH terms
Cognitive Training, Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Transfer, Psychology, Young Adult, Executive Function

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