IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/intell/v77y2019ics0160289619301680.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Working memory training does not enhance older adults' cognitive skills: A comprehensive meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Sala, Giovanni
  • Aksayli, N. Deniz
  • Tatlidil, K. Semir
  • Gondo, Yasuyuki
  • Gobet, Fernand

Abstract

In the last two decades, considerable efforts have been devoted to finding a way to enhance cognitive function by cognitive training. To date, the attempt to boost broad cognitive functions in the general population has failed. However, it is still possible that some cognitive training regimens exert a positive influence on specific populations, such as older adults. In this meta-analytic review, we investigated the effects of working memory (WM) training on older adults' cognitive skills. Three robust-variance-estimation meta-analyses (N = 2140, m = 43, and k = 698) were run to analyze the effects of the intervention on (a) the trained tasks, (b) near-transfer measures, and (c) far-transfer measures. While large effects were found for the trained tasks (g¯ = 0.877), only modest (g¯ = 0.274) and near-zero (g¯ = 0.121) effects were obtained in the near-transfer and far-transfer meta-analyses, respectively. Publication-bias analysis provided adjusted estimates that were slightly lower. Moreover, when active control groups were implemented, the far-transfer effects were null (g¯ = −0.008). Finally, the effects were highly consistent across studies (i.e., low or null true heterogeneity), especially in the near- and far-transfer models. While confirming the difficulty in obtaining transfer effects with cognitive training, these results corroborate recent empirical evidence suggesting that WM is not isomorphic with other fundamental cognitive skills such as fluid intelligence.

Suggested Citation

  • Sala, Giovanni & Aksayli, N. Deniz & Tatlidil, K. Semir & Gondo, Yasuyuki & Gobet, Fernand, 2019. "Working memory training does not enhance older adults' cognitive skills: A comprehensive meta-analysis," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:77:y:2019:i:c:s0160289619301680
    DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2019.101386
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289619301680
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.intell.2019.101386?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amit Lampit & Harry Hallock & Michael Valenzuela, 2014. "Computerized Cognitive Training in Cognitively Healthy Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Effect Modifiers," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-18, November.
    2. Sue Duval & Richard Tweedie, 2000. "Trim and Fill: A Simple Funnel-Plot–Based Method of Testing and Adjusting for Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 56(2), pages 455-463, June.
    3. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    4. Colin B. Begg & Jesse A. Berlin, 1988. "Publication Bias: A Problem in Interpreting Medical Data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 151(3), pages 419-445, May.
    5. Sven Kepes & Michael A McDaniel, 2015. "The Validity of Conscientiousness Is Overestimated in the Prediction of Job Performance," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(10), pages 1-22, October.
    6. Viechtbauer, Wolfgang, 2010. "Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 36(i03).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lawlor-Savage, Linette & Kusi, Mavis & Clark, Cameron M. & Goghari, Vina M., 2021. "No evidence for an effect of a working memory training program on white matter microstructure," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christopher Winchester & Kelsey E. Medeiros, 2023. "In Bounds but Out of the Box: A Meta-Analysis Clarifying the Effect of Ethicality on Creativity," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(3), pages 713-743, March.
    2. Mohith M. Varma & Shengzi Zeng & Laura Singh & Emily A. Holmes & Jingyun Huang & Man Hey Chiu & Xiaoqing Hu, 2024. "A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental methods for modulating intrusive memories following lab-analogue trauma exposure in non-clinical populations," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 8(10), pages 1968-1987, October.
    3. Woodley of Menie, Michael A. & Peñaherrera-Aguirre, Mateo & Sarraf, Matthew A., 2022. "Signs of a Flynn effect in rodents? Secular differentiation of the manifold of general cognitive ability in laboratory mice (Mus musculus) and Norwegian rats (Rattus norvegicus) over a century—Results," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    4. Barbara Wilhelm & Lisa Waddell & Judy Greig & Ian Young, 2019. "Systematic review and meta-analysis of the seroprevalence of hepatitis E virus in the general population across non-endemic countries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-27, June.
    5. Sergio Nolazco & Kaspar Delhey & Shinichi Nakagawa & Anne Peters, 2022. "Ornaments are equally informative in male and female birds," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10, December.
    6. Eleonore Batteux & Eamonn Ferguson & Richard J Tunney, 2019. "Do our risk preferences change when we make decisions for others? A meta-analysis of self-other differences in decisions involving risk," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-19, May.
    7. Steur, Gijs & Verburg, René W. & Wassen, Martin J. & Verweij, Pita A., 2020. "Shedding light on relationships between plant diversity and tropical forest ecosystem services across spatial scales and plot sizes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    8. Scharfen, Jana & Peters, Judith Marie & Holling, Heinz, 2018. "Retest effects in cognitive ability tests: A meta-analysis," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 44-66.
    9. Rodrigo Fernández López & Adoración Antolí, 2020. "Computer-based cognitive interventions in acquired brain injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-14, July.
    10. Alba Carrillo & María Rubio-Aparicio & Guadalupe Molinari & Ángel Enrique & Julio Sánchez-Meca & Rosa M Baños, 2019. "Effects of the Best Possible Self intervention: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-23, September.
    11. Bart Verkuil & Serpil Atasayi & Marc L Molendijk, 2015. "Workplace Bullying and Mental Health: A Meta-Analysis on Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-16, August.
    12. Daniele Zago & Maria Eugênia Andrighetto Canozzi & Júlio Otávio Jardim Barcellos, 2020. "Pregnant beef cow’s nutrition and its effects on postnatal weight and carcass quality of their progeny," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-20, August.
    13. Viktoria Maria Baumeister & Leonie Petra Kuen & Maike Bruckes & Gerhard Schewe, 2021. "The Relationship of Work-Related ICT Use With Well-being, Incorporating the Role of Resources and Demands: A Meta-Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(4), pages 21582440211, November.
    14. Christopher Snyder & Ran Zhuo, 2018. "Sniff Tests as a Screen in the Publication Process: Throwing out the Wheat with the Chaff," NBER Working Papers 25058, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Piers Steel & Sjoerd Beugelsdijk & Herman Aguinis, 2021. "The anatomy of an award-winning meta-analysis: Recommendations for authors, reviewers, and readers of meta-analytic reviews," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(1), pages 23-44, February.
    16. Mattia Filomena & Matteo Picchio, 2023. "Retirement and health outcomes in a meta‐analytical framework," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 1120-1155, September.
    17. Molo, Fabio & Pawel, Samuel & Fraga González, Gorka, 2024. "A Robustness Reproduction of "A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 90 Cohort Studies of Social Isolation, Loneliness and Mortality"," I4R Discussion Paper Series 169, The Institute for Replication (I4R).
    18. Augusteijn, Hilde Elisabeth Maria & van Aert, Robbie Cornelis Maria & van Assen, Marcel A. L. M., 2021. "Posterior Probabilities of Effect Sizes and Heterogeneity in Meta-Analysis: An Intuitive Approach of Dealing with Publication Bias," OSF Preprints avkgj, Center for Open Science.
    19. Ritchwood, Tiarney D. & Ford, Haley & DeCoster, Jamie & Sutton, Marnie & Lochman, John E., 2015. "Risky sexual behavior and substance use among adolescents: A meta-analysis," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 74-88.
    20. Georgiou, George K. & Guo, Kan & Naveenkumar, Nithya & Vieira, Ana Paula Alves & Das, J.P., 2020. "PASS theory of intelligence and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:77:y:2019:i:c:s0160289619301680. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/intelligence .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.