Working memory training in typically developing children: A multilevel meta-analysis

Working memory (WM) training in typically developing (TD) children aims to enhance not only performance in memory tasks but also other domain-general cognitive skills, such as fluid intelligence. These benefits are then believed to positively affect academic achievement. Despite the numerous studies...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Psychonomic bulletin & review 2020-06, Vol.27 (3), p.423-434
Hauptverfasser: Sala, Giovanni, Gobet, Fernand
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 434
container_issue 3
container_start_page 423
container_title Psychonomic bulletin & review
container_volume 27
creator Sala, Giovanni
Gobet, Fernand
description Working memory (WM) training in typically developing (TD) children aims to enhance not only performance in memory tasks but also other domain-general cognitive skills, such as fluid intelligence. These benefits are then believed to positively affect academic achievement. Despite the numerous studies carried out, researchers still disagree over the real benefits of WM training. With this meta-analysis ( m = 41, k = 393, N = 2,375), we intended to resolve the discrepancies by focusing on the potential sources of within-study and between-study true heterogeneity. Small to medium effects were observed in memory tasks (i.e., near transfer). The size of these effects was proportional to the similarity between the training task and the outcome measure. By contrast, far-transfer measures of cognitive ability (e.g., intelligence) and academic achievement (mathematics and language ability) were essentially unaffected by the training programs, especially when the studies implemented active controls ( g ¯ = 0.001, SE = 0.055, p = .982, τ 2 = 0.000). Crucially, all the models exhibited a null or low amount of true heterogeneity, which was wholly explained by the type of controls (nonactive vs. active) and by statistical artifacts, in contrast to the claim that this field has produced mixed results. Since the empirical evidence shows the absence of both generalized effects and true heterogeneity, we conclude that there is no reason to keep investing resources in WM training research with TD children.
doi_str_mv 10.3758/s13423-019-01681-y
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2338999366</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2338999366</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-6863802342deb64a510c2a7b2ad89b4fe9ec974eee9bd1f970ade6fa0eca6f8a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtPxCAUhYnROOPoH3BhmrhxU4XSUnA3mfhKJnEzxiWh7e3ISB9Ca9J_L7U-EhcuCHDvdw6Xg9ApwZc0TfiVIzSOaIiJ8ItxEg57aE4SSsKERnjfnzEToaA8nqEj53YY44QJdohmlAgqCBZztHlu7Kuut0EFVWOHoLNK1-Nd10E3tDpXxgxBAe9gmnas5y_aFBbq62AZVL3ptBl7Xt6pUNXKDE67Y3RQKuPg5GtfoKfbm83qPlw_3j2sluswj4noQsYZ5TjynyggY7FKCM4jlWaRKrjI4hIE5CKNAUBkBSlFilUBrFQYcsVKrugCXUy-rW3eenCdrLTLwRhVQ9M7GVHKhRCUMY-e_0F3TW_9vJ6KCecYxwn1VDRRuW2cs1DK1upK2UESLMfM5ZS59JnLz8zl4EVnX9Z9VkHxI_kO2QN0Apxv1Vuwv2__Y_sBSh2Odg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2418800453</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Working memory training in typically developing children: A multilevel meta-analysis</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Sala, Giovanni ; Gobet, Fernand</creator><creatorcontrib>Sala, Giovanni ; Gobet, Fernand</creatorcontrib><description>Working memory (WM) training in typically developing (TD) children aims to enhance not only performance in memory tasks but also other domain-general cognitive skills, such as fluid intelligence. These benefits are then believed to positively affect academic achievement. Despite the numerous studies carried out, researchers still disagree over the real benefits of WM training. With this meta-analysis ( m = 41, k = 393, N = 2,375), we intended to resolve the discrepancies by focusing on the potential sources of within-study and between-study true heterogeneity. Small to medium effects were observed in memory tasks (i.e., near transfer). The size of these effects was proportional to the similarity between the training task and the outcome measure. By contrast, far-transfer measures of cognitive ability (e.g., intelligence) and academic achievement (mathematics and language ability) were essentially unaffected by the training programs, especially when the studies implemented active controls ( g ¯ = 0.001, SE = 0.055, p = .982, τ 2 = 0.000). Crucially, all the models exhibited a null or low amount of true heterogeneity, which was wholly explained by the type of controls (nonactive vs. active) and by statistical artifacts, in contrast to the claim that this field has produced mixed results. Since the empirical evidence shows the absence of both generalized effects and true heterogeneity, we conclude that there is no reason to keep investing resources in WM training research with TD children.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1069-9384</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1531-5320</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3758/s13423-019-01681-y</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31939109</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Academic achievement ; Behavioral Science and Psychology ; Cognition &amp; reasoning ; Cognitive ability ; Cognitive Psychology ; Dyslexia ; Intelligence ; Learning disabilities ; Memory ; Meta-analysis ; Population ; Psychology ; Researchers ; Systematic review ; Theoretical Review ; Training</subject><ispartof>Psychonomic bulletin &amp; review, 2020-06, Vol.27 (3), p.423-434</ispartof><rights>The Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2020</rights><rights>Copyright Springer Nature B.V. Jun 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-6863802342deb64a510c2a7b2ad89b4fe9ec974eee9bd1f970ade6fa0eca6f8a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-6863802342deb64a510c2a7b2ad89b4fe9ec974eee9bd1f970ade6fa0eca6f8a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1589-3759</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758/s13423-019-01681-y$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.3758/s13423-019-01681-y$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31939109$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sala, Giovanni</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gobet, Fernand</creatorcontrib><title>Working memory training in typically developing children: A multilevel meta-analysis</title><title>Psychonomic bulletin &amp; review</title><addtitle>Psychon Bull Rev</addtitle><addtitle>Psychon Bull Rev</addtitle><description>Working memory (WM) training in typically developing (TD) children aims to enhance not only performance in memory tasks but also other domain-general cognitive skills, such as fluid intelligence. These benefits are then believed to positively affect academic achievement. Despite the numerous studies carried out, researchers still disagree over the real benefits of WM training. With this meta-analysis ( m = 41, k = 393, N = 2,375), we intended to resolve the discrepancies by focusing on the potential sources of within-study and between-study true heterogeneity. Small to medium effects were observed in memory tasks (i.e., near transfer). The size of these effects was proportional to the similarity between the training task and the outcome measure. By contrast, far-transfer measures of cognitive ability (e.g., intelligence) and academic achievement (mathematics and language ability) were essentially unaffected by the training programs, especially when the studies implemented active controls ( g ¯ = 0.001, SE = 0.055, p = .982, τ 2 = 0.000). Crucially, all the models exhibited a null or low amount of true heterogeneity, which was wholly explained by the type of controls (nonactive vs. active) and by statistical artifacts, in contrast to the claim that this field has produced mixed results. Since the empirical evidence shows the absence of both generalized effects and true heterogeneity, we conclude that there is no reason to keep investing resources in WM training research with TD children.</description><subject>Academic achievement</subject><subject>Behavioral Science and Psychology</subject><subject>Cognition &amp; reasoning</subject><subject>Cognitive ability</subject><subject>Cognitive Psychology</subject><subject>Dyslexia</subject><subject>Intelligence</subject><subject>Learning disabilities</subject><subject>Memory</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Population</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Researchers</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Theoretical Review</subject><subject>Training</subject><issn>1069-9384</issn><issn>1531-5320</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kEtPxCAUhYnROOPoH3BhmrhxU4XSUnA3mfhKJnEzxiWh7e3ISB9Ca9J_L7U-EhcuCHDvdw6Xg9ApwZc0TfiVIzSOaIiJ8ItxEg57aE4SSsKERnjfnzEToaA8nqEj53YY44QJdohmlAgqCBZztHlu7Kuut0EFVWOHoLNK1-Nd10E3tDpXxgxBAe9gmnas5y_aFBbq62AZVL3ptBl7Xt6pUNXKDE67Y3RQKuPg5GtfoKfbm83qPlw_3j2sluswj4noQsYZ5TjynyggY7FKCM4jlWaRKrjI4hIE5CKNAUBkBSlFilUBrFQYcsVKrugCXUy-rW3eenCdrLTLwRhVQ9M7GVHKhRCUMY-e_0F3TW_9vJ6KCecYxwn1VDRRuW2cs1DK1upK2UESLMfM5ZS59JnLz8zl4EVnX9Z9VkHxI_kO2QN0Apxv1Vuwv2__Y_sBSh2Odg</recordid><startdate>20200601</startdate><enddate>20200601</enddate><creator>Sala, Giovanni</creator><creator>Gobet, Fernand</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1589-3759</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200601</creationdate><title>Working memory training in typically developing children: A multilevel meta-analysis</title><author>Sala, Giovanni ; Gobet, Fernand</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c419t-6863802342deb64a510c2a7b2ad89b4fe9ec974eee9bd1f970ade6fa0eca6f8a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Academic achievement</topic><topic>Behavioral Science and Psychology</topic><topic>Cognition &amp; reasoning</topic><topic>Cognitive ability</topic><topic>Cognitive Psychology</topic><topic>Dyslexia</topic><topic>Intelligence</topic><topic>Learning disabilities</topic><topic>Memory</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Population</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Researchers</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Theoretical Review</topic><topic>Training</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sala, Giovanni</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gobet, Fernand</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Psychonomic bulletin &amp; review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sala, Giovanni</au><au>Gobet, Fernand</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Working memory training in typically developing children: A multilevel meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>Psychonomic bulletin &amp; review</jtitle><stitle>Psychon Bull Rev</stitle><addtitle>Psychon Bull Rev</addtitle><date>2020-06-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>27</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>423</spage><epage>434</epage><pages>423-434</pages><issn>1069-9384</issn><eissn>1531-5320</eissn><abstract>Working memory (WM) training in typically developing (TD) children aims to enhance not only performance in memory tasks but also other domain-general cognitive skills, such as fluid intelligence. These benefits are then believed to positively affect academic achievement. Despite the numerous studies carried out, researchers still disagree over the real benefits of WM training. With this meta-analysis ( m = 41, k = 393, N = 2,375), we intended to resolve the discrepancies by focusing on the potential sources of within-study and between-study true heterogeneity. Small to medium effects were observed in memory tasks (i.e., near transfer). The size of these effects was proportional to the similarity between the training task and the outcome measure. By contrast, far-transfer measures of cognitive ability (e.g., intelligence) and academic achievement (mathematics and language ability) were essentially unaffected by the training programs, especially when the studies implemented active controls ( g ¯ = 0.001, SE = 0.055, p = .982, τ 2 = 0.000). Crucially, all the models exhibited a null or low amount of true heterogeneity, which was wholly explained by the type of controls (nonactive vs. active) and by statistical artifacts, in contrast to the claim that this field has produced mixed results. Since the empirical evidence shows the absence of both generalized effects and true heterogeneity, we conclude that there is no reason to keep investing resources in WM training research with TD children.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>31939109</pmid><doi>10.3758/s13423-019-01681-y</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1589-3759</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1069-9384
ispartof Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2020-06, Vol.27 (3), p.423-434
issn 1069-9384
1531-5320
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2338999366
source Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings
subjects Academic achievement
Behavioral Science and Psychology
Cognition & reasoning
Cognitive ability
Cognitive Psychology
Dyslexia
Intelligence
Learning disabilities
Memory
Meta-analysis
Population
Psychology
Researchers
Systematic review
Theoretical Review
Training
title Working memory training in typically developing children: A multilevel meta-analysis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T23%3A00%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Working%20memory%20training%20in%20typically%20developing%20children:%20A%20multilevel%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=Psychonomic%20bulletin%20&%20review&rft.au=Sala,%20Giovanni&rft.date=2020-06-01&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=423&rft.epage=434&rft.pages=423-434&rft.issn=1069-9384&rft.eissn=1531-5320&rft_id=info:doi/10.3758/s13423-019-01681-y&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2338999366%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2418800453&rft_id=info:pmid/31939109&rfr_iscdi=true