title: There is no convincing evidence that working memory training is effective: A reply to Au et al. (2014) and Karbach and Verhaeghen (2014).
abstract: The possible cognitive benefits of working memory training programs have been the subject of intense interest and controversy. Recently two meta-analyses have claimed that working memory training can be effective in enhancing cognitive skills in adulthood (Au et al. Behavioural Brain Research 228:(1) 107-115, 2014) and stemming cognitive decline in old age (Karbach & Verhaeghen Psychological Science 25:2027-2037, 2014). The current article critically evaluates these claims. We argue that these meta-analyses produce misleading results because of (1) biases in the studies included, (2) a failure to take account of baseline differences when calculating effect sizes, and (3) a failure to emphasize the difference between studies with treated versus untreated control groups. We present new meta-analyses and conclude that there is no convincing evidence that working memory training produces general cognitive benefits.
authors.affiliation: Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
authors.forename: Monica
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Melby-Lervåg
authors.affiliation: Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. c.hulme@ucl.ac.uk.|Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, University College London, Chandler House, 2 Wakefield St., London, WCIN 2PF, UK. c.hulme@ucl.ac.uk.
authors.forename: Charles
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Hulme
mesh_terms: D000375:Aging; D001076:Aptitude; D056344:Executive Function; D005260:Female; D015577:Geriatric Assessment / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D007360:Intelligence; D007858:Learning; D008297:Male; D008570:Memory, Short-Term; D011214:Practice, Psychological
keywords: Cognitive training; Working memory