4 ms·
It seems that meta-analysis confirms the usefulness of things like dual-N-back training. Does anyone disagree? https://www.gwern.net/DNB%20meta-analysis https:
by fsiefken 10y ago
It seems that meta-analysis confirms the usefulness of things like dual-N-back training. Does anyone disagree?
https://www.gwern.net/DNB%20meta-analysis https://www.gwern.net/DNB%20meta-analysis
https://www.quora.com/How-does-dual-n-back-actually-increase-IQ https://www.quora.com/How-does-dual-n-back-actually-increase...
For an n-back like exercise:
http://cognitivefun.net/test/22 http://cognitivefun.net/test/22
- jackcosgrove 10y agoI think this is the only proven "brain training" that works, and the effect is temporary.
- mark_kalvelage 10y agoYou need to read gwern's link more closely. Second paragraph: This indicates that the medium effect size is due to methodological problems and that n-back training does not increase subjects’ underlying fluid intelligence
- Bartweiss 10y agoMost damningly, the review didn't turn up dose-dependent results. If n-back works, I would expect either "more is better" or "flat gain past some minimum". Instead, the effect vs training graph is a shapeless cloud, which seems like a major warning sign.