Working memory training in typically developing children: A meta-analysis of the available evidence.

Abstract

The putative effectiveness of working memory (WM) training at enhancing cognitive and academic skills is still ardently debated. Several researchers have claimed that WM training fosters not only skills such as visuospatial WM and short-term memory (STM), but also abilities outside the domain of WM, such as fluid intelligence and mathematics. Other researchers, while acknowledging the positive effect of WM training on WM-related cognitive skills, are much more pessimistic about the ability of WM training to improve other cognitive and academic skills. In other words, the idea that far-transfer-that is, the generalization of a set of skills across two domains only loosely related to each other-may take place in WM training is still controversial. In this meta-analysis, the authors focused on the effects of WM training on cognitive and academic skills (e.g., fluid intelligence, attention/inhibition, mathematics, and literacy) in typically developing (TD) children (aged 3 to 16). Whereas WM training exerted a significant effect on cognitive skills related to WM training (g = 0.46), little evidence was found regarding far-transfer effects (g = 0.12). Moreover, the size of the effects was inversely related to the quality of the design (i.e., random allocation to the groups and presence of an active control group). Results suggest that WM training is ineffective at enhancing TD children's cognitive or academic skills and that, when positive effects are observed, they are modest at best. Thus, in line with other types of training, far-transfer rarely occurs and its effects are minimal. (PsycINFO Database Record

Mapping the Dimensions of General Intelligence: An Integrated Differential-Developmental Theory

“…The pattern is clear by now and in agreement with this assumption: studies attempting to change general intelligence by training working memory, speed, or executive control did succeed with their chosen factor. However, they did not appreciably enhance g [Melby-Lervag, Redick, & Hulme, 2016;Sala & Gobet, 2017;Protzko, 2015;Shipstead, Redick, & Engle, 2012].…”

My Command, My Act: Observation Inflation in Face-To-Face Interactions

“…In their meta-analysis, Melby-Lervåg and Hulme (2013) conclude that WM training studies only show a short-term effect of medium size—a finding further corroborated by more recent meta-analyses (Sala & Gobet, 2017; Schwaighofer et al, 2015). Furthermore, the near-transfer to related but not trained tasks was low (see also Rode, Robson, Purviance, Geary, & Mayr, 2014), as was far-transfer (Sala & Gobet, 2017; Schwaighofer et al, 2015).…”

“…Furthermore, the near-transfer to related but not trained tasks was low (see also Rode, Robson, Purviance, Geary, & Mayr, 2014), as was far-transfer (Sala & Gobet, 2017; Schwaighofer et al, 2015). Thus, we followed a suggestion by Schwaighofer et al (2015) and opted against a training involving several tasks.…”

“…Albeit the training of (pre-)school children’s WM showed substantial improvement within the trained WM tasks over a short period of time, it is still debated to what extant training can be generalized to other processes and whether observed training effects are maintained over longer periods of time (see Diamond & Lee, 2011; Melby-Lervåg & Hulme, 2013; Sala & Gobet, 2017; Schwaighofer, Fischer, & Bühner, 2015, for recent reviews and meta-analyses). Different types of effects after training can be demonstrated depending on the duration of the trainings, the type, as well as the variety of tasks employed and the level of the to-be trained processes (see Sala & Gobet, 2017; Schwaighofer et al, 2015). However, most training studies focus on three different outcomes.…”

“…Second, if training is not only task-specific but is thought to tackle more general processes (i.e., acquisition of general skills to react to certain task affordances), training positive outcomes (i.e., improvements) on the nontrained tasks that also tap into related working memory processes ( near-transfer tasks ) should be observed. Third, it has been proposed that inasmuch as training affects general processes, such as cognitive speed or problem solving capabilities, there should also be outcomes of training observable on unrelated measures, such as IQ (i.e., far-transfer , see Sala & Gobet, 2017). …”