Practice makes imperfect: Working memory training can harm recognition memory performance

Abstract

There is a great deal of debate concerning the benefits of working memory (WM) training and whether that training can transfer to other tasks. Although a consistent finding is that WM training programs elicit a short-term neartransfer effect (i.e., improvement in WM skills), results are inconsistent when considering persistence of such improvement and far transfer effects. In this study, we compared three groups of participants: a group that received WM training, a group that received training on how to use a mental imagery memory strategy, and a control group that received no training. Although the WM training group improved on the trained task, their posttraining performance on nontrained WM tasks did not differ from that of the other two groups. In addition, although the imagery training group's performance on a recognition memory task increased after training, the WM training group's performance on the task decreased after training. Participants' descriptions of the strategies they used to remember the studied items indicated that WM training may lead people to adopt memory strategies that are less effective for other types of memory tasks. These results indicate that WM training may have unintended consequences for other types of memory performance.

Efficacy of Working Memory Training in Middle-aged Adults

“…In the present research, the specific WM training effects on the 17 trained tasks among the participants of the experimental group were analyzed and the results showed significant gains on all the trained WM tasks from the pre to post-training assessments. This finding is similar to earlier studies which have reported evidence for substantial enhancements in the performance on the trained tasks with WM training (Guye, Simoni, & von Bastian, 2017;Matzen et al, 2016;von Bastian & Oberauer, 2014). Similar evidence on the improvements on the trained tasks have been reported among young-aged and old-aged adults (Karbach & Verhaeghen, 2014;Melby-Lervåg et al, 2016) and in our earlier research among middle-aged adults (Mridula et al, 2017;Namratha et al, 2017).…”

Cognitive Improvement and Brain Changes after Real-Time Functional MRI Neurofeedback Training in Healthy Elderly and Prodromal Alzheimer’s Disease

“…The issue of worse performance in the WMS visual memory task in group PA is more difficult to explain. The adoption of techniques and strategies that enhance performance in one cognitive domain but impair another, suggesting negative transfer ( 61 , 62 ), has been recently reported ( 63 ). There is not much further literature on this matter, especially not in the context of rtfMRI neurofeedback training.…”

The bizarreness effect and visual imagery: No impact of concurrent visuo-spatial distractor tasks indicates little role for visual imagery.

“…There are different variants of the visual-imagery hypothesis, but the general idea is that when participants generate images for both common and bizarre items the images for the bizarre items are visually more distinctive (e.g., Black et al, 2012; Campos et al, 2009; Geraci et al, 2013; McDaniel & Einstein, 1986) or require more transformations in their creation that leads to better encoding for these items and, therefore, greater recall (e.g., Marshall et al, 1979; Wollen & Margres, 1987; see Worthen, 2006, for review). More generally, both ancient and modern writers propose that bizarre imagery enhances memory, and that the result is a bizarre imagery effect (e.g., Black et al, 2012; Burns, 1996; Buzan, 1991; Campos et al, 2008, 2009; Cornoldi et al, 1988; Dalgleish et al, 2013; Lorayne, 2010; Matzen et al, 2016; McDaniel & Einstein, 1986; Yates, 1966).…”

“…9-10). Modern self-help books for memory enhancement echo this ancient advice (Buzan, 1991;Lorayne & Lucas, 1974;Lorayne, 2010), as does recent research on memory therapeutics and memory training (Dalgleish et al, 2013;Dalgleish & Werner-Seidler, 2014;Matzen et al, 2016).…”