Most evidence for the compensation account of cognitive training is unreliable.
Cognitive training and brain stimulation studies have suggested that human cognition, primarily working memory and attention control processes, can be enhanced. Some authors claim that gains (i.e., post-test minus pretest scores) from such interventions are unevenly distributed among people. The mag...
| Publicado en: | Memory & Cognition Vol. 46; no. 8; pp. 1315 - 1331 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
Nov2018
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=133453124&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 133453124 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 0090502X MEG jtl: Memory & Cognition issn: 0090502X maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Nov2018 vid: 46 iid: 8 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature artinfo: ui: 133453124 10.3758/s13421-018-0839-z ppf: 1315 ppct: 16 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 675KB tig: atl: Most evidence for the compensation account of cognitive training is unreliable. aug: au: Smoleń, Tomasz Jastrzebski, Jan Estrada, Eduardo Chuderski, Adam affil: Jagiellonian University, ul. Grodzka 52, 31-044, Krakow, Poland University of California, Davis, 135 Young Hall, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA, USA su: Cognition Electric stimulation Regression analysis Short-term memory Pre-tests & post-tests Control groups Psychoeducation sug: subj: Cognition Electric stimulation Regression analysis Short-term memory Pre-tests & post-tests Control groups Psychoeducation keyword: Compensation effect Regression to the mean Stimulation Training Compensation effect Regression to the mean Stimulation Training ab: Cognitive training and brain stimulation studies have suggested that human cognition, primarily working memory and attention control processes, can be enhanced. Some authors claim that gains (i.e., post-test minus pretest scores) from such interventions are unevenly distributed among people. The magnification account (expressed by the evangelical "who has will more be given") predicts that the largest gains will be shown by the most cognitively efficient people, who will also be most effective in exploiting interventions. In contrast, the compensation account ("who has will less be given") predicts that such people already perform at ceiling, so interventions will yield the largest gains in the least cognitively efficient people. Evidence for this latter account comes from reported negative correlations between the pretest and the training/stimulation gain. In this paper, with the use of mathematical derivations and simulation methods, we show that such correlations are pure statistical artifacts caused by the widely known methodological error called "regression to the mean". Unfortunately, more advanced methods, such as alternative measures, linear models, and control groups do not guarantee correct assessment of the compensation effect either. The only correct method is to use direct modeling of correlations between latent true measures and gain. As to date no training/stimulation study has correctly used this method to provide evidence in favor of the compensation account, we must conclude that most (if not all) of the evidence should be considered inconclusive. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|