Does working memory training in children need to be adaptive? A randomized controlled trial.
Saved in:
| Title: | Does working memory training in children need to be adaptive? A randomized controlled trial. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Lau, Regine Cassandra (AUTHOR), Anderson, Peter J. (AUTHOR), Gathercole, Susan (AUTHOR), Wiley, Joshua F. (AUTHOR), Spencer‐Smith, Megan (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Child Development. Mar/Apr2025, Vol. 96 Issue 2, p508-526. 19p. |
| Subjects: | Short-term memory, School children, Cognitive training, Attention, Reasoning, Raven's Progressive Matrices |
| Geographic Terms: | Australia |
| Abstract: | Most cognitive training programs are adaptive, despite limited direct evidence that this maximizes children's outcomes. This randomized controlled trial evaluated working memory training with difficulty of activities presented using adaptive, self‐select, or stepwise compared with an active control. At baseline, immediately, and 6‐months post‐intervention, 201 Australian primary school children (101 males, 7–11 years) completed working memory tests (near and intermediate transfer) and the Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices, and caregivers completed the attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder‐Rating Scale‐5 (far transfer). The intervention comprised ten 20‐min sessions delivered in class. For each training condition, compared with the active control, there was no evidence of transfer immediately or 6‐months post‐intervention (negligible to small effects). This trial provides no evidence that adaptive working memory training maximizes children's outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Child Development is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Most cognitive training programs are adaptive, despite limited direct evidence that this maximizes children's outcomes. This randomized controlled trial evaluated working memory training with difficulty of activities presented using adaptive, self‐select, or stepwise compared with an active control. At baseline, immediately, and 6‐months post‐intervention, 201 Australian primary school children (101 males, 7–11 years) completed working memory tests (near and intermediate transfer) and the Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices, and caregivers completed the attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder‐Rating Scale‐5 (far transfer). The intervention comprised ten 20‐min sessions delivered in class. For each training condition, compared with the active control, there was no evidence of transfer immediately or 6‐months post‐intervention (negligible to small effects). This trial provides no evidence that adaptive working memory training maximizes children's outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 00093920 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/cdev.14180 |
