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

Area of Science:

• Cognitive psychology
• Developmental psychology
• Educational psychology

Background:

• Cognitive training programs often use adaptive difficulty, assuming it maximizes benefits for children.
• However, empirical evidence directly supporting the superiority of adaptive training for children's outcomes is limited.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate the effectiveness of working memory training with adaptive, self-select, or stepwise difficulty compared to an active control in primary school children.
• To determine if adaptive working memory training maximizes cognitive outcomes in children.

Main Methods:

• A randomized controlled trial involving 201 Australian primary school children (7-11 years).
• Intervention included ten 20-minute sessions of working memory training with varying difficulty levels (adaptive, self-select, stepwise) or an active control.
• Cognitive outcomes were assessed using working memory tests (near/intermediate transfer), Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices, and ADHD-Rating Scale-5 (far transfer) at baseline, immediately, and 6 months post-intervention.

Main Results:

• No significant transfer effects were observed for any training condition compared to the active control, either immediately or at 6-month follow-up.
• Observed effects for transfer were negligible to small, indicating no practical benefit from the working memory interventions.
• Caregiver-reported ADHD symptoms (far transfer) also showed no improvement across conditions.

Conclusions:

• This study provides no evidence that adaptive working memory training is superior to other training methods or an active control in improving cognitive outcomes for children.
• The findings challenge the widespread assumption that adaptive difficulty is essential for maximizing the benefits of cognitive training programs in pediatric populations.