Does working memory training lead to generalized improvements in children with low working memory? A randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Children with low working memory typically make poor educational progress, and it has been speculated that difficulties in meeting the heavy working memory demands of the classroom may be a contributory factor. Intensive working memory training has been shown to boost performance on untrained memory tasks in a variety of populations. This first randomized controlled trial with low working memory children investigated whether the benefits of training extend beyond standard working memory tasks to other more complex activities typical of the classroom in which working memory plays a role, as well as to other cognitive skills and developing academic abilities. Children aged 7–9 years received either adaptive working memory training, non-adaptive working memory training with low memory loads, or no training. Adaptive training was associated with selective improvements in multiple untrained tests of working memory, with no evidence of changes in classroom analogues of activities that tax working memory, or any other cognitive assessments. Gains in verbal working memory were sustained one year after training. Thus the benefits of working memory training delivered in this way may not extend beyond structured working memory tasks.

LearningRx Cognitive Training Effects in Children Ages 8–14: A Randomized Controlled Trial

“…Mahncke et al (2006) tested the effect through the use of two control groups and concluded that the lack of difference between the two control groups suggests that there is no meaningful placebo effect with this type of study. Dunning et al (2013) used a similar dual control group design and also concluded that experimental gains were not likely the result of expectancy effects. Burki, Ludwig, Chicherio, and Ribaupierre (2014) reported comparable results, finding no significant differences in training outcomes between active controls and no‐contact controls.…”

“…The modification of ‘IQ’ has been an elusive quest of many neuroplasticity researchers who have found little transfer from targeted cognitive training interventions to general intelligence (Chein & Morrison, 2010; Dunning, Holmes, & Gathercole, 2013). Although transfer from working memory training to fluid intelligence has been documented in several small studies (Jaeggi, Buschkuehl, Jonides, & Perrig, 2008; Jaušovec & Jaušovec, 2012), skepticism continues to permeate the field (Redick et al, 2013).…”

“…Given the growing research base on the associations among working memory and intelligence (Cornoldi & Giofre, 2014), and working memory and learning (Alloway & Copello, 2013), it is easy to see why a majority of the cognitive training programs target working memory. Certainly, most of the studies do cite improvements in working memory (Beck, Hanson, & Puffenberger, 2010; Dunning et al, 2013; Gray et al, 2012; Holmes & Gathercole, 2014; Wiest, Wong, Minero, & Pumaccahua, 2014), but pretest to post‐test gains have also been documented in fluid reasoning (Barkl, Porter, & Ginns, 2012; Jaeggi et al, 2008; Mackey, Hill, Stone, & Bunge, 2011), processing speed (Mackey et al, 2011), reading (Loosli, Buschkuehl, Perrig, & Jaeggi, 2012; Shalev, Tsal, & Mevorach, 2007), computational accuracy (Witt, 2011), and attention (Rabiner, Murray, Skinner, & Malone, 2010; Tamm, Epstein, Peugh, Nakonezny, & Hughes, 2013). …”

“…Hayward, Das, and Janzen (2007) used the full scale score on the Das–Naglieri Cognitive Assessment System (CAS) in their study of the COGENT cognitive training program but did not find significant group differences on the measure. Dunning et al (2013) included the Wechsler Abbreviated Scales of Intelligence in their measures of working memory training outcomes and found no evidence that training working memory leads to enhancement in non‐verbal intelligence score. This finding that the training did not impact IQ score was consistent with findings from a previous study on the same working memory training program (Holmes et al, 2010).…”

Changes in behavior and salivary cortisol after targeted cognitive training in typical 12-month-old infants.

“…Comparable studies with older children have generally found that training effects, where detectable, tend to be maintained at intervals ranging from two months to a year (Dunning et al, 2013;Klingberg et al, 2005;Rueda, Rothbart, McCandliss, Saccomanno, & Posner, 2005). However, it is unknown whether training effects are as persistent in infants.…”