Open AccessTraining executive functions using an adaptive procedure over 21 days (10 training sessions) and an active control group
Author(s) -
Martina De Lillo,
Victoria E.A. Brunsdon,
Elisabeth E.F. Bradford,
Frank Gasking,
Heather J. Ferguson
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
the quarterly journal of experimental psychology/quarterly journal of experimental psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.249
H-Index - 76
eISSN - 1747-0226
pISSN - 1747-0218
DOI - 10.1177/17470218211002509
Subject(s) - cognitive training , task (project management) , executive functions , cognition , working memory training , psychology , cognitive flexibility , training (meteorology) , flexibility (engineering) , cognitive psychology , working memory , elementary cognitive task , control (management) , computer science , artificial intelligence , neuroscience , statistics , physics , mathematics , management , meteorology , economics
The degree to which executive function (EF) abilities (including working memory [WM], inhibitory control [IC], and cognitive flexibility [CF]) can be enhanced through training is an important question; however, research in this area is inconsistent. Previous cognitive training studies largely agree that training leads to improvements in the trained task, but the generalisability of this improvement to other related tasks remains controversial. In this article, we present a pre-registered experiment that used an adaptive training procedure to examine whether EFs can be enhanced through cognitive training, and directly compared the efficacy and generalisability across sub-components of EF using training programmes that target WM, IC, or CF versus an active control group. Participants ( n = 160) first completed a battery of tasks that assessed EFs, then were randomly assigned to one of the four training groups, and completed an adaptive procedure over 21 days (10 training sessions) that targeted a specific sub-component of EF (or was comparatively engaging and challenging, but did not train a specific EF). At post-test, participants returned to the lab to repeat the battery of EF tasks. Results revealed robust direct training effects (i.e., on trained task), but limited evidence to support near (i.e., same EF, different task) and far (i.e., different EF and task) transfer effects. Where indirect training benefits emerged, the effects were more readily attributable to the overlapping training/assessment task routines, rather than more general enhancements to the underlying cognitive processes or neural circuits.