2019
DOI: 10.1007/s41465-018-0115-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Improving Methodological Standards in Behavioral Interventions for Cognitive Enhancement

Abstract: There is substantial interest in the possibility that cognitive skills can be improved by dedicated behavioral training. Yet despite the large amount of work being conducted in this domain, there is not an explicit and widely-agreed upon consensus around the best methodological practices. This document seeks to fill this gap. We start from the perspective that there are many types of studies that are important in this domain-e.g., feasibility, mechanistic, efficacy, effectiveness. These studies have fundamenta… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
82
0
11

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

4
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 161 publications
(104 citation statements)
references
References 134 publications
1
82
0
11
Order By: Relevance
“…We implemented a quasi-experimental longitudinal controlled and randomized design, classified as an efficacy study [50] (Figure 1). Children were distributed into intervention (INT) and control (CON) groups and classified as high-and low-performing groups based on the children's baseline performance in three tasks, i.e., inhibitory control, working memory, and planning.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We implemented a quasi-experimental longitudinal controlled and randomized design, classified as an efficacy study [50] (Figure 1). Children were distributed into intervention (INT) and control (CON) groups and classified as high-and low-performing groups based on the children's baseline performance in three tasks, i.e., inhibitory control, working memory, and planning.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Running studies in the school context are recommended as good practice [54] and were proven to be feasible and reliable in the field [28,31,32,55].This type of approach allowed us to come and go between the mechanistic and efficacy study questions while testing the lab-based measures in the children's daily real-world contexts [50]. In addition, the friendly context allowed us to access a bigger sample and increase the amount of time spent assessing and training the participants.…”
Section: General Aspectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Notably, the blinding of participants in exercise studies is exceedingly difficult because the participants notice if they are exercising or not. To minimize the risk of bias arising from not blinding participants (e.g., due to expectation effects), it is recommended that future studies should control appropriately for confounders, for instance, by assessing additional biopsychosocial variables (e.g., sleep, level of arousal, mood) [114][115][116][117][118] and/or a placebo group [116] (e.g., the placebo [sham] group performs the same exercise but without loading [119,120] or an inadequate dose to induce considerable effects [121]) when possible. Furthermore, with respect to the domain of "other bias", we recommend that upcoming studies pay stronger attention to developing a more rigorous study design (see the next Section 4.2, Study characteristics, for a detailed discussion, as well as Figure 4) [33] and better exercise prescription (see Section 4.3, Exercise characteristics, for a detailed discussion).…”
Section: Risk Of Biasmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Over the last decade, the scientific topic of improving cognitive capacity by leveraging the plasticity of the brain has gathered both significant interest and controversies regarding effectiveness (Karbach and Unger, 2014;Au et al, 2016;Melby-Lervåg et al, 2016;Simons et al, 2016;Green et al, 2018;Soveri et al, 2018;Redick, 2019). For example, one of the most popular approaches is to train working memory (WM), a limited-capacity system involved in temporary storage and manipulation of information (Baddeley, 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%