How to play 20 questions with nature and lose: Reflections on 100 years of brain-training research.
review · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 30275315.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1073/pnas.1617102114 and PMC identifier 6176639.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Despite dozens of empirical studies and a growing body of meta-analytic work, there is little consensus regarding the efficacy of cognitive training. In this review, we examine why this substantial corpus has failed to answer the often-asked question, "Does cognitive training work?" We first define cognitive training and discuss the general principles underlying training interventions. Next, we review historical interventions and discuss how findings from this early work remain highly relevant for current cognitive-training research. We highlight a variety of issues preventing real progress in understanding the underlying mechanisms of training, including the lack of a coherent theoretical framework to guide training research and methodological issues across studies and meta-analyses. Finally, suggestions for correcting these issues are offered in the hope that we might make greater progress in the next 100 y of cognitive-training research.
Medical subject headings
- Behavioral Research
- Cognition