Working-memory-only training shows no positive evidence of efficacy in healthy older adults¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesisr3·q4
Currency · newest study 2014 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q4 i? Across all studies and subgroups, there was no positive evidence for the efficacy of training involving WM as the training content. → Lampit A 2014
Evidence¶
Lampit A 2014¶
Lampit A, Hallock H, Valenzuela M (2014) Computerized Cognitive Training in Cognitively Healthy Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Effect Modifiers. PLoS Med 11(11): e1001756. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001756
q4 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3
Summary matrix of domain-by-moderator subgroup meta-analyses (Figure 12) showed no positive evidence for WM training content in any subgroup. The authors note this is similar to limited effects reported in a recent meta-analysis in children and young adults.
"From this figure it is evident that there is no positive evidence for the efficacy of training involving WM (based on either all studies or by subgroup), nor for training administered more than three sessions per week, for any of the cognitive outcomes in this review."
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Working Memory — outcome: instruction changes it
- Executive Function — outcome: instruction changes it
Related Claims¶
- CCT shows no significant effects on executive functions or attention in healthy older adults — related
- Computerized cognitive training produces a small but statistically significant improvement in cognitive performance in healthy older adults — related
- CCT yields small significant gains in nonverbal memory, working memory, and visuospatial skills, but only weak evidence for verbal memory — related
- Group-based CCT is effective while home-based CCT is not — related
- Training more than three sessions per week neutralizes CCT efficacy, while one or 2–3 sessions per week are effective — related
- CCT improves processing speed with a moderate effect, the largest domain effect, though with large heterogeneity — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
wm-only-training-ineffective-older-adults |
title |
Working-memory-only training shows no positive evidence of efficacy in healthy older adults |
description |
Working-memory-only training shows no positive evidence of efficacy in healthy older adults |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2014 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-15 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — lampit-a-2014 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.