The neural correlates of working memory training in typically developing children

Does working memory training in children need to be adaptive? A randomized controlled trial

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.

Training and asymmetrical transfer effects of working memory and inhibitory control in primary school children

Working memory (WM) and inhibitory control (IC) are two fundamental and supportive components of executive function (EF) that are critical for school-age children. However, the direct comparison of the training and transfer effects of WM and IC training in school-age children still needs to be improved. This study adopted a "pre-, post-, and delayed posttest" design to compare the training, near-transfer, and far-transfer effects of WM and IC in school-age children. A total of 60 children aged 8 to 10 years were randomly assigned to the WM training group, IC training group, or control group. Children in the WM and IC training groups completed 12 sessions of multiple adaptive training tasks tapping different subcomponents of WM (visual-spatial and verbal WM) and IC (interference control and response inhibition) separately. In the pretraining, posttraining, and 6-month follow-up stages, we used WM and IC tasks to evaluate training and near-transfer effects and used analogical reasoning tasks to evaluate far-transfer effects. Results showed significant training effects on visual-spatial and verbal WM, near-transfer effects on response inhibition, and far-transfer effects on analogical reasoning for WM training in the posttraining stage. The improvements in verbal WM and analogical reasoning were maintained for 6 months, whereas for IC training only the training effects on response inhibition and the far-transfer effects on analogical reasoning were observed in the posttraining stage and only the training effects on response inhibition were maintained for 6 months. Results suggested positive training and asymmetrical transfer effects of WM and IC training, which provide new evidence for the effectiveness of WM and IC training in school-age children.