Assessing the Impact of Expectations in Cognitive Training and Beyond

Abstract

Over the past several decades, empirical and theoretical work has focused on the question of whether it is possible to purposefully improve cognitive functioning through behavioral interventions. Accordingly, a field is emerging around cognitive training, be it through executive function training, video game play, music training, aerobic exercise, or mindfulness meditation. One concern that has been raised regarding the results of this field centers on the potential impact of participants' expectations. Suggestions have been raised that participants may, at least in some cases, show improvements in performance because they expect to improve, rather than because of any mechanisms inherent in the behavioral interventions per se. The present paper discusses the latest views on expectations and the new methodological challenges they raise when considering the effectiveness of behavioral interventions on human behavior, and in particular cognition. Keywords Expectations . Cognitive training . Placebo . Associative learning . Bayesian combination There is currently a great deal of interest in the possibility that human cognitive function can be purposefully improved via dedicated long-term behavioral training (Strobach and Karbach 2016). Indeed, the past few decades have seen an explosion of work examining the potential for behavioral training to positively impact a host of cognitive functions, including fluid intelligence (Au et al. 2015), working memory (Nutley and Söderqvist 2017), spatial thinking (Uttal et al. 2013a), executive function (Titz and Karbach 2014), and selective attention (Parsons et al. 2016).Like all nascent scientific domains, much of the research to date has focused on basic science questions. Such investigations include, for instance, examinations of the core mechanisms underlying cognitive change and how these could be deliberately manipulated to produce intended outcomes (Bavelier et al. 2010;Deveau et al. 2015). Yet, the obvious real-world significance of successful cognitive enhancement has also prompted a substantial amount of work probing possible avenues for translation. Many distinct populations of individuals could potentially realize significant benefits from effective means of cognitive enhancement, especially those showing deficits in cognitive functioning for reasons related to various disorders, damage, disease, and/or age-related degradation (Biagianti and Vinogradov 2013;Mahncke et al. 2006;Ross et al. 2017). Even among those individuals within the normal range of cognitive functioning, cognitive enhancement could be advantageous in a host of real-world situations, from law enforcement, to piloting, to athletics, to academic pursuits (McKinley et al. 2011;Rosser et al. 2007;Uttal et al. 2013a;Uttal et al. 2013b).While the results of numerous individual studies and metaanalyses have provided reason for optimism that cognitive functions can be enhanced via some forms of behavioral training, significant debate in the field still persists (Green et al.Daphné Bavelier and C. Shawn Gree...

Prismatic adaptation coupled with cognitive training as novel treatment for developmental dyslexia: a randomized controlled trial

“…However, perfect blinding is unfortunately rarely achieved in drug trials 115 , not to mention in behavioral treatment trials, where there is simply no way to create two outwardly identical interventions. A growing body of literature has been debating on the malleability of cognitive functions according to expectations (i.e., how much the single participant places a positive value on the intervention and expects it will improve a certain ability) 116 , 117 . However, significant debate still exists in the field with mixed results 118 – 122 .…”

Self-reported Outcome Expectations of Non-invasive Brain Stimulation Are Malleable: a Registered Report that Replicates and Extends Rabipour et al. (2017)

“…A potential reason for these mixed results could be the failure to account for expectations of outcomes, which can skew participants' perceptions of improvement from interventions and possibly lead to positive expectancy or placebo and placebo-like effects (Benedetti, 2014;Boot et al, 2013;Braga et al, 2021;Foroughi et al, 2016;Rabipour et al, 2018a;Rabipour et al, 2017Rabipour et al, , 2019Rabipour et al, 2018b;Rabipour & Davidson, 2015;Schwarz et al, 2016;Simons et al, 2016), though this has not been observed in all cognitive enhancement studies (Denkinger et al, 2021;Tsai et al, 2018;Vodyanyk et al, 2021). Outcome expectations could partially or fully explain any cognitive enhancement gains of NIBS interventions.…”

Reverse effect of home-use binaural beats brain stimulation

“…There is no research, however, into the placebo effect when it comes to home-use NIBS aimed at facilitating everyday cognitive activities, for example by listening to binaural beats on one's headphones while learning 34,35 . Yet, many studies have indicated that the positive effects of various forms of brain training commonly used at home 36 , for example brain games, are linked to the fact that those who use them expect to improve and believe in brain training effectiveness rather than to any mechanisms inherent in such training per se [37][38][39][40][41] . It seems that the same applies to home-use binaural beats brain stimulation.…”