A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence on the near- and far-transfer effects among children’s executive function skills.

Abstract

In the present meta-analysis we examined the near- and far-transfer effects of training components of children’s executive functions skills: working memory, inhibitory control, and cognitive flexibility. We found a significant near-transfer effect (g+ = 0.44, k = 43, p < .001) showing that the interventions in the primary studies were successful in training the targeted components. However, we found no convincing evidence of far-transfer (g+ = 0.11, k = 17, p = .11). That is, training a component did not have a significant effect on the untrained components. By showing the absence of benefits that generalize beyond the trained components, we question the practical relevance of training specific executive function skills in isolation. Furthermore, the present results might explain the absence of far-transfer effects of working memory training on academic skills (Melby-Lervag & Hulme, 2013; Sala & Gobet, 2017).

The Role of Executive Functions in Socioeconomic Attainment Gaps: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial

“…It has been proposed that early development may be the optimal time to intervene, before any negative effects fully embed (Heckman, 2006;Ramey & Ramey, 1998). A common approach to improving children's executive functions has been through cognitive training programs which directly target specific executive functions (Kassai, Futo, Demetrovics, & Takacs, 2019). Meta-analyses of studies with adults and older children indicate that training that targets working memory and inhibitory control can lead to improvements on trained constructs-so-called "near transfer"-but does not lead to improvements on untrained constructs, or "far transfer" (Kassai et al, 2019;Melby-Lerv ag & Hulme, 2013;Sala & Gobet, 2017;Schwaighofer, Fischer, & Buhner, 2015).…”

Cognitive and academic benefits of music training with children: A multilevel meta-analysis

“…For instance, WM training does not enhance children's domain-general cognitive skills or academic achievement Melby-Lervåg et al, 2016;Sala & Gobet, 2020). The same applies to action and nonaction videogame training and brain training (Duyck & Op de Beeck, 2019;Kassai, Futo, Demetrovics, & Takacs, 2019;Libertus et al, 2017;Lintern & Boot, 2019;Sala, Tatlidil, & Gobet, 2018Simons et al, 2016).…”

From Evaluation to Prediction: Behavioral Effects and Biological Markers of Cognitive Control Intervention

“…Karbach and Verhaeghen examined the effects of process-based cognitive control training in older adults; their interventions resulted in promising transfer of the training effects, as significant medium to small-sized effects were observed in the performance of the trained task, neartransfer tasks, and far-transfer tasks [6]. However, studies have also shown that the transfer effect decreases with increasing distance between two tasks [24,[28][29][30][31]. Metaanalyses of transfer effects on cognitive control among children, young and older adults suggested a significant near-transfer effect and no convincing evidence of fartransfer [24,29,32].…”

“…However, studies have also shown that the transfer effect decreases with increasing distance between two tasks [24,[28][29][30][31]. Metaanalyses of transfer effects on cognitive control among children, young and older adults suggested a significant near-transfer effect and no convincing evidence of fartransfer [24,29,32]. The evidence from young adults indicates that working memory training did not elicit any improvements across all ranges of transfer [33], but produced short-term, specific training effects that do not generalize to measures of "real-world," such as intelligence, life ability, or academic performance [27,32].…”