Posted: Feb 15, 2011 1:07 am
@ Elena:
Thank you for the response. I was able to find full text for the "Cognitive Training RCT1", and have read the abstracts of the others, as well as gone over the open access article which you linked. The full text for the 2800 person RCT was very interesting. I was surprised that the training caused so much improvement. What's more, it seemed that a few booster classes were able to maintain the initial results over a two year span. However, while it appears that reasoning (74%) and speed (87%) training were able to create cognitive improvement, memory improved in only 26% of participants after training. Perhaps, this would show that memory is more difficult to improve, or that there is more permanence in age related decline compared to the other results. Overall it seems the outcomes were very positive, and that significant cognitive change can occur even in the later years.
In the full text article you linked2, I found it fascinating that elderly adults who received training were able to best a cohort of college students, albeit ones who were untrained. It would be interesting to see if these findings are replicated on a larger scale, as 32 people comprised the experimental group and 20 the control.
Looking at this study in particular though, I find a large problem with university learning. Most information and research is rather cut and dry in class. In this study, Posit Science is providing funding, has three article authors on their staff with company investments, and the training software is their own. The company sells "brain training" games/software for $350-$700 a pop. I really find it difficult to determine how skeptical I should be. Even with that being said, the results do look promising.
I would be interested to learn more about neuroplasticity, and the methods used to create cognitive improvement. I had always heard, and apparently accepted as fact, that if you didn't start learning a language or play an instrument from a young age that you were pretty much doomed to mediocrity in those areas. However, if pronounced changes are possible in elderly adults through training, then perhaps that assumption is wrong or less prominent than I had thought. Thanks again for all the thought provoking links.
Source:
1. (PDF) http://geron.psu.edu/sls/Effects_of_cog_training_02.pdf
2. http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0011537
Edit: Grammar
Thank you for the response. I was able to find full text for the "Cognitive Training RCT1", and have read the abstracts of the others, as well as gone over the open access article which you linked. The full text for the 2800 person RCT was very interesting. I was surprised that the training caused so much improvement. What's more, it seemed that a few booster classes were able to maintain the initial results over a two year span. However, while it appears that reasoning (74%) and speed (87%) training were able to create cognitive improvement, memory improved in only 26% of participants after training. Perhaps, this would show that memory is more difficult to improve, or that there is more permanence in age related decline compared to the other results. Overall it seems the outcomes were very positive, and that significant cognitive change can occur even in the later years.
In the full text article you linked2, I found it fascinating that elderly adults who received training were able to best a cohort of college students, albeit ones who were untrained. It would be interesting to see if these findings are replicated on a larger scale, as 32 people comprised the experimental group and 20 the control.
Looking at this study in particular though, I find a large problem with university learning. Most information and research is rather cut and dry in class. In this study, Posit Science is providing funding, has three article authors on their staff with company investments, and the training software is their own. The company sells "brain training" games/software for $350-$700 a pop. I really find it difficult to determine how skeptical I should be. Even with that being said, the results do look promising.
I would be interested to learn more about neuroplasticity, and the methods used to create cognitive improvement. I had always heard, and apparently accepted as fact, that if you didn't start learning a language or play an instrument from a young age that you were pretty much doomed to mediocrity in those areas. However, if pronounced changes are possible in elderly adults through training, then perhaps that assumption is wrong or less prominent than I had thought. Thanks again for all the thought provoking links.
Source:
1. (PDF) http://geron.psu.edu/sls/Effects_of_cog_training_02.pdf
2. http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0011537
Edit: Grammar