No evidence of intelligence improvement after working memory training: a randomized, placebo-controlled study.
By Thomas S. Redick, Zach Shipstead, T. Harrison, Kenny L. Hicks, D. Fried, David Z. Hambrick, M. Kane, R. Engle. Journal of experimental psychology. General, 2013
624 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d43f6297c833c62e0035f848b62c4b1e49ba5bcb
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Developmental and Educational Psychology
- Thomas S. Redick
- Daphne Bavelier
- Richard J. Haier
- C. Shawn Green
- Walter R. Boot
- Valerie J. Shute
- Daniel J. Simons
- Giovanni Sala
In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
- Thomas S. Redick
- Richard J. Haier
- Daphne Bavelier
- C. Shawn Green
- Jason M. Chein
- Lee A. Thompson
- Weng-Tink Chooi
- Walter R. Boot
Citations in the corpus
- Working memory training and interpreting interactions in intelligence interventions (2015, background): “Previously, my colleagues and I (Redick et al., 2013; Shipstead, Redick, & Engle, 2010, 2012) have discussed issues that affect interpretation of the transfer results in WM training studies, including the use of the following: (a) no-contact control groups; (b) single measures to represent entire co”
- The power of play: The effects of Portal 2 and Lumosity on cognitive and noncognitive skills (2015, background): “However, several recent studies have been conducted that challenge the assumption that cognitive training, using games like Lumosity, promotes generalization or learning transfer beyond the actual tasks performed during treatment (Ackerman, Kanfer, & Calderwood, 2010; Boot, Champion, et al., 2013; R”
- Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis (2014, neutral): “(Harrison, Shipstead, Hicks, Hambrick, Redick, & Engle, 2013, p. 2418) The cognitive training literature has seen an explosion of recent interest in exploring the claim that gains in working memory (WM) training might transfer to gains in measures of fluid intelligence ( Gf ).”
- Working Memory Underpins Cognitive Development, Learning, and Education (2013, neutral): “…have suggested that working memory training sometimes improves performance on the working memory task that is trained, but does not generalize to reasoning tasks that must rely on working memory (in adults, Redick et al. 2013, and Shipstead et al. 2012; in children, Melby-Lervåg and Hulme 2013).”
- Working memory training does not improve intelligence in healthy young adults (2012, background): “Redick et al. (2012) showed no evidence of improved intelligence after working memory training in a randomized, placebo-controlled study.”
- Adaptive n-back training does not improve fluid intelligence at the construct level: Gains on individual tests suggest that training may enhance visuospatial processing (2013, methodology): “The same lack of change was noted by Chooi and Thompson (2012) and by Jaeggi et al. (2010) for the operation span task, as well as by Redick et al. (2012) for the symmetry and running span tasks.”
- Training working memory: Limits of transfer (2013, background): “For example, Shipstead, Redick, and Engle (2012) (see also Redick et al., 2013; Melby-Lervåg & Hulme, 2012) have argued that the majority of the empirical studies purported to show benefits of cognitive training were fundamentally flawed in ways that prevent drawing straightforward interpretations,…”
- The Pervasive Problem With Placebos in Psychology (2013, background): “In fact, when other researchers did measure expectations (Redick et al., 2012), those who received memory training believed that they had shown improved intelligence, memory, and ability to complete daily activities after training.”
- Near and Far Transfer in Cognitive Training: A Second-Order Meta-Analysis (2019, background): “In fact, the large effect sizes reported by early studies have been subsequently found to be either significantly smaller or null (e.g., Redick et al., 2013; Rickard, Bambrick, & Gill, 2012; van Ravenzwaaij, Boekel, Forstmann, Ratcliff, & Wagenmakers, 2014).”