Sharp Brains: Brain Fitness and Cognitive Health News

Neuroplasticity, Brain Fitness and Cognitive Health News


Does cognitive training work? (For Whom? For What?)

The grow­ing field of cog­ni­tive train­ing (one of the tools for brain fit­ness) can appear very con­fus­ing as the media keeps report­ing con­tra­dic­tory claims. These claims are often based on press releases, with­out a deeper eval­u­a­tion of the sci­en­tific evidence.

Let’s take a cou­ple of recent exam­ples, in suc­ces­sive days:

It doesn’t work!” type of head­line:
Reuters (Feb. 10, 2009)  For­mal brain exer­cise won’t help healthy seniors: research
Healthy older peo­ple shouldn’t bother spend­ing money on com­puter games and web­sites promis­ing to ward off men­tal decline, the author of a review of sci­en­tific evi­dence for the ben­e­fits of these “brain exer­cise” pro­grams says.

It works! type of head­line:
Sci­enceDaily (Feb. 11, 2009)  “Com­puter Exer­cises Improve Mem­ory And Atten­tion, Study Sug­gests“
Accord­ing to the researchers, par­tic­i­pants who used the Brain Fit­ness Pro­gram also scored as well as those ten years younger, on aver­age, on mem­ory and atten­tion tests for which they did not train.

So, does struc­tured brain exer­cise / cog­ni­tive train­ing work or not?

The prob­lem may in fact reside in ask­ing this very ques­tion in the first place, as Alvaro pointed out a while ago in his arti­cle Alzheimer’s Dis­ease: too seri­ous to play with head­lines.

We need a more nuanced set of questions.

Why? Because:
1. Cog­ni­tion is made of sev­eral dif­fer­ent abil­i­ties (work­ing mem­ory, atten­tion, exec­u­tive func­tions such as decision-making, etc)
2. Avail­able train­ing pro­grams do not all train the same abil­i­ties
3. Users of train­ing pro­grams do not all have the same needs or goals
4. We need to dif­fer­en­ti­ate between enhanc­ing cog­ni­tive func­tions and delay­ing the onset of cog­ni­tive deficits such as Alzheimer’s.

Let’s illus­trate these points, by ana­lyz­ing briefly the very same study that allowed Reuters Health to claim that “For­mal “brain exer­cise” won’t help healthy seniors”:

1 + 2: Con­trary to what you may believe if you only read the Reuters head­line, the review study cited did find 10 high-quality stud­ies in which brain exer­cises suc­cess­fully improved tar­geted func­tions in healthy older adults. Which sug­gests that brain exer­cises “work” when used to boost spe­cific cog­ni­tive skills, and that effects last longer than the train­ing itself.

Train­ing pro­grams do not all train the same abil­i­ties. If I need to train my exec­u­tive func­tions and use a pro­gram that trains basic audi­tory skills, I may well con­clude that this pro­gram does not “work”. But this pro­gram may work for some­body who needs help in audi­tory pro­cess­ing areas.

3 + 4– Why a per­son uses a train­ing pro­gram makes a big dif­fer­ence in the assess­ment of whether this pro­gram works or not.

As men­tioned above, a per­son who reads the review ask­ing whether using a train­ing pro­gram may enhance some cog­ni­tive skills, will prob­a­bly con­clude that a good num­ber of pro­grams work — age itself is not an obstacle.

Fur­ther, the review shows that in the 4 stud­ies that tracked ben­e­fits a few months to a few years after the train­ing, ben­e­fits (or sig­nif­i­cant part of them) remained. So it is not that the report didn’t find any study that showed that the pro­grams work beyond the train­ing period itself; what it noted, and jus­ti­fi­ably so, was the very small num­ber of long-term stud­ies to start with!
The authors of the review also acknowl­edge that evi­dence sup­ports the value of cog­ni­tive train­ing with peo­ple who have mild cog­ni­tive impair­ment and even Alzheimer’s Dis­ease (before exclud­ing such evi­dence from their review in order to focus exclu­sively on healthy adults).

Now, if some­one in Obama’s health­care team reads the review ask­ing, Is there enough evi­dence to invest $5 bil­lion today in buy­ing prod­ucts and dis­trib­ute them to the pub­lic at large in order to pre­vent the upcom­ing Alzheimer’s Dis­ease prob­lem?, it is much harder to decide that the pro­grams work for the good rea­son that sci­en­tists do not know yet whether this is an effi­cient and sus­tained way to do so. It would be arguably be pre­ma­ture to invest those $5 bil­lion in buy­ing prod­ucts today.

Let’s now con­trast in more depth those 2 recent stud­ies and try to under­stand what they mean and what they do not mean.

Papp, Walsh, & Sny­der (2009), reported in Reuters as “train­ing doesn’t work”, con­ducted a meta-analysis of the stud­ies pub­lished after 1992 that used cog­ni­tive train­ing with healthy older adults. They included only high-quality well-conducted stud­ies (ran­dom­ized con­trolled tri­als pub­lished in peer-reviewed jour­nals), which left 10 stud­ies in the analysis.

The results con­sis­tently sug­gested that cog­ni­tive skills can be trained, no mat­ter the age group, on a short-term basis. How­ever it is not always the case that the train­ing ben­e­fits trans­fer to untrained tasks, even when these are cog­ni­tively close to the trained tasks.

Only 4 stud­ies assessed long-term train­ing ben­e­fits. They showed that small ben­e­fits were main­tained over time after the train­ing (dur­ing a period of sev­eral months for 2 stud­ies and up to 5 years for one study).

The authors con­cluded that there was almost no evi­dence for long-term ben­e­fits BECAUSE most of the stud­ies do not assess long-term benefits.

What this study means:

  • Short-term improve­ments can be obtained for some spe­cific cog­ni­tive skills when using a com­put­er­ized train­ing pro­gram. These improve­ments last longer than the train­ing itself.
  • Stud­ies that assess long-term ben­e­fits of cog­ni­tive train­ing (i.e., delay in onset of demen­tia) are rare; thus the evi­dence for long-term ben­e­fits is scant. We need more research.

What this study does not mean:

  • Cog­ni­tive train­ing CAN post­pone the emer­gence of Alzheimer’s.
  • Cog­ni­tive train­ing CANNOT post­pone the emer­gence of Alzheimer’s.
  • We sim­ply don’t know yet! We need more research track­ing the direct impact of cog­ni­tive train­ing over the long haul.

Now, let’s review the other study, reported in Sci­ence Daily.

Smith and col­leagues (2009), “train­ing works!”, reported the results of a large ran­dom­ized, con­trolled, double-blind study test­ing the short-term effects of a com­put­er­ized train­ing pro­gram (Posit Sci­ence clas­sic pro­gram). The IMPACT study involved 487 healthy adults, aged 65 and older, for an amount of 40h of train­ing (1h per day, 5 days per week for 8 weeks). Par­tic­i­pants either used a brain train­ing pro­gram or watch edu­ca­tional DVD fol­lowed by quizzes (con­trol group). The pro­gram includes 6 exer­cises designed to improve the speed and accu­racy of audi­tory infor­ma­tion processing.

Par­tic­i­pants who used the train­ing pro­gram showed improve­ment in most of the tests used to assess their audi­tory mem­ory per­for­mance. Such improve­ment was not shown in the con­trol group.

What this study means:

  • Short-term improve­ments can be obtained for some spe­cific cog­ni­tive skills by using a com­put­er­ized train­ing program.
  • These improve­ments can gen­er­al­ize from the trained tasks to untrained tasks that are cog­ni­tively close.

What this study does not mean:

  • Com­put­er­ized train­ing pro­grams can post­pone the emer­gence of dementia.
  • Com­put­er­ized train­ing pro­grams can­not post­pone the emer­gence of dementia.
  • This train­ing gen­er­al­izes to every impor­tant cog­ni­tive skill one would like to main­tain as we age, or that one’s brain get’s 10 years younger.
  • All train­ing pro­grams will show ben­e­fits for every­body: Train­ing ben­e­fits do not seem to trans­fer to tasks that are not cog­ni­tively close to the trained tasks. Thus one needs to under­stand what tool to use — which is why Sharp­Brains released this 10-Question Eval­u­a­tion Check­list to help con­sumers and pro­fes­sion­als make informed decisions.


What those 2 recent stud­ies say and imply

  • Cog­ni­tive train­ing can help healthy adults improve spe­cific cog­ni­tive skills, and improve­ments seem to last longer than the train­ing itself (Willis et al., 2006; Smith et al., 2009).
  • Cog­ni­tive train­ing can help adults in the early stages of cog­ni­tive impair­ment and demen­tia improve some cog­ni­tive skills (Sitzer et al, 2006)
  • One needs to make informed deci­sions. Sharp­Brains’ Eval­u­a­tion Check­list may prove useful.

What nei­ther study says or implies

  • Whether cog­ni­tive train­ing can post­pone the emer­gence of demen­tia: More long-term stud­ies are needed. (We know that men­tally stim­u­lat­ing activ­i­ties can help build a Cog­ni­tive Reserve and delay symp­toms of Alzheimer’s Dis­ease, but that evi­dence is not based on ran­dom­ized clin­i­cal tri­als like the ones dis­cussed above).


- Papp, Walsh, & Sny­der. (2009). Imme­di­ate and delayed effects of cog­ni­tive inter­ven­tions in healthy elderly: A review of cur­rent lit­er­a­ture and future direc­tions. Alzheimer’s & Demen­tia, 50–60.

- Sitzer, Twamley, & Jeste (2006). Cog­ni­tive train­ing in Alzheimer’s Dis­ease: A meta-analysis of the lit­er­a­ture. Acta Psy­chi­atr Scand, 114, 75–90.

- Smith et al. A Cog­ni­tive train­ing pro­gram designed based on prin­ci­ples of brain plas­tic­ity: Results from the Improve­ment in Mem­ory with Plasticity-based Adap­tive Cog­ni­tive Train­ing Study. Jour­nal of the Amer­i­can Geri­atrics Soci­ety, April 2009.

- Willis, S. L., Tennst­edt, S. L., Mar­siske, M., Ball, K., Elias, J., Koepke, K. M., Mor­ris, J. N., Rebok, G. W. Unverzagt, F. W. Stod­dard, A. M., & Wright, E. (2006). Long-term effects of cog­ni­tive train­ing on every­day func­tional out­comes in older adults. Jour­nal of the Amer­i­can Med­ical Asso­ci­a­tion, 296(23), 2805–2814.

Pascale MichelonPas­cale Mich­e­lon, Ph. D., is Sharp­Brains’ Research Man­ager for Edu­ca­tional Projects. Dr. Mich­e­lon has a Ph.D. in Cog­ni­tive Psy­chol­ogy and has worked as a Research Sci­en­tist at Wash­ing­ton Uni­ver­sity in Saint Louis, in the Psy­chol­ogy Depart­ment. She con­ducted sev­eral research projects to under­stand how the brain makes use of visual infor­ma­tion and mem­o­rizes facts. She is now an Adjunct Fac­ulty at Wash­ing­ton University.

Be Socia­ble, Share!
    Print This Article Print This Article

    Categories: Cognitive Neuroscience, Health & Wellness, Technology

    Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

    New online course: How to Nav­i­gate Con­ven­tional and Com­ple­men­tary ADHD Treat­ments for Healthy Brain Development (early bird rates end April 1st)

    Haven’t read this book yet?

    Follow us via


    Welcome to

    As seen in The New York Times, The Wall Street Jour­nal, CNN and more, Sharp­Brains is an inde­pen­dent mar­ket research firm track­ing health and well­ness appli­ca­tions of brain science.
    FIRST-TIME VISITOR? Dis­cover HERE the most pop­u­lar resources at
    Enter Your Email to receive Sharp­Brains free, monthly eNewslet­ter:
    Join more than 50,000 Sub­scribers and stay informed and engaged.