Related resources
Full-text held externally
- PMID: 20407435
- UKPMCID: 20407435
- DOI: 10.1038/nature09042
Search for item elsewhere
University researcher(s)
Academic department(s)
Putting brain training to the test.
Owen, Adrian M; Hampshire, Adam; Grahn, Jessica A; Stenton, Robert; Dajani, Said; Burns, Alistair S; Howard, Robert J; Ballard, Clive G
Nature. 2010;465(7299):775-8.
Access to files
Full-text and supplementary files are not available from Manchester eScholar. Full-text is available externally using the following links:
Full-text held externally
- PMID: 20407435
- UKPMCID: 20407435
- DOI: 10.1038/nature09042
Abstract
'Brain training', or the goal of improved cognitive function through the regular use of computerized tests, is a multimillion-pound industry, yet in our view scientific evidence to support its efficacy is lacking. Modest effects have been reported in some studies of older individuals and preschool children, and video-game players outperform non-players on some tests of visual attention. However, the widely held belief that commercially available computerized brain-training programs improve general cognitive function in the wider population in our opinion lacks empirical support. The central question is not whether performance on cognitive tests can be improved by training, but rather, whether those benefits transfer to other untrained tasks or lead to any general improvement in the level of cognitive functioning. Here we report the results of a six-week online study in which 11,430 participants trained several times each week on cognitive tasks designed to improve reasoning, memory, planning, visuospatial skills and attention. Although improvements were observed in every one of the cognitive tasks that were trained, no evidence was found for transfer effects to untrained tasks, even when those tasks were cognitively closely related.