The Brain-Training Debate Continues
The popularity of computerized brain-fitness programs seems to be steadily growing—but so, too, is a lively debate among experts about whether these programs actually work.
A Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) expert says the programs can be helpful if they replace activities that do not provide brain stimulation, such as watching television, or if they provide enjoyable and absorbing intellectual engagement, such as that delivered by certain types of video games.
“The truth is that there is a great deal of disagreement on the subject of brain training,” says Laura Germine, PhD, research fellow in the psychiatric and neurodevelopmental genetics unit at MGH. “Some experts believe it’s the next big thing in brain health, and others believe unequivocally that it doesn’t work. The truth is probably somewhere in between: Brain-training programs may have positive effects, but for many participants, these effects may not be very strong.”
WHAT YOU CAN DO
If you are interested in learning more about yourself and your brain, Dr. Germine suggests visiting her website, at testmybrain.org
The not-for-profit site—which has tested more than 1.5 million people to date—collects data for scientific purposes and provides a series of research-based cognitive tests, along with confidential feedback on each participant’s unique brain profile. The results of your tests, along with those of thousands of other participants, are used to test scientific theories about the way the brain works.
Finding a Program
If you are interested in trying a brain-training program, Dr. Germine advises exploring your options before signing up. Does the program you are interested in have some scientific evidence behind it? Research that has been replicated several times is an indication that the program has an evidence base. Is it an enjoyable activity? A brain-training activity that seems burdensome or causes you stress will be much less effective. Is the brain training reasonably priced? There’s little point in making a financial sacrifice to engage in brain training. Instead, you might consider trying free online puzzles and games, or taking up activities in your daily life that offer you mental stimulation, such as a new hobby.
“Remember that anything you do changes your brain in some way, whether it’s a formal training program, a game of chess, or just forming a memory in everyday life,” Dr. Germine says. “If you are looking to be more intellectually engaged, find a brain-stimulating activity that gets you up and motivated, and do it. The more concentration an activity requires, the greater the potential benefit.”
Two years ago, a group of 75 scientists from Harvard, Stanford, and other institutions signed a statement announcing that, in their opinion, there is no compelling evidence that brain-training programs are effective in improving overall cognitive function or reducing or reversing cognitive decline. However, shortly thereafter, another group of 131 scientists joined colleagues at Johns Hopkins University in signing a statement proclaiming their belief that “a substantial and growing body of evidence shows that certain cognitive training programs can significantly improve cognitive function.”
To add to the confusion, in January 2016 the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) charged Lumosity, one of the nation’s most successful online brain-training programs, with failing to show real-world benefits from their programs and won a settlement of $2 million. In May, the FTC charged another brain-training program, LearningRX, with similar unsubstantiated claims, and won a $200,000 settlement.
“The marketing and advertising in these cases went too far, with claims suggesting that brain training might help users avoid Alzheimer’s disease or prevent cognitive decline,” says Dr. Germine, who is president of the Many Brains Project, a non-profit company that produces software designed to assess brain health. “The fact is that there are legitimate differences on the subject. However, to prove real benefit, scientists need to prove that the benefits of training are generalizable—that they transfer to other mental activities.”
Conflicting Research
It might be reasonable to assume that research trials could put an end to the raging controversy, and indeed, there have been a number of studies on the effects of brain training. The problem is that the results of these studies are conflicting. For example:
▶ In 2010, an English study involving 11,500 adults required participants to perform a range of training tasks for at least 10 minutes a day three times per week for six weeks. Tests given to participants at the beginning and end of the study period revealed that, although there was some improvement in skills used in the training tasks, there was no transfer of these cognitive abilities to other tasks.
▶ In a 2013 brain-training study using a multitasking video game called NeuroRacer, participants were required to play the driving game for one hour a day, three times per week for one month. Analysis of the results showed that participants’ performance in overall short-term memory and attention improved significantly, despite the fact that these skills were not specific to the computer training.
▶ In other research published in 2013, scientists sought to determine whether adults who participated in two different types of memory training programs for a total of 20 sessions showed any signs of cognitive improvement. Results showed that, although the participants improved in performing the specific tasks in which they trained, they showed no improvements in performance on tests of general cognitive ability.
▶ A 2015 study found significant benefits among 7,000 older adults who engaged in at least 10 minutes a day of online brain training involving reasoning and problem-solving tasks. Test results after six months showed participants had improved in measures of memory and reasoning, and in the performance of everyday tasks like cooking, managing personal finances, shopping, and getting around on public transportation.
Highly Personal
More extensive research is required before the reason for the apparent conflicts among findings becomes clear. Meanwhile, Dr. Germine theorizes that much of the difference in brain-training results may be associated with factors linked to individual participants—such as their intellectual background, daily activities, and motivation.
“If you are normally actively engaged in mentally stimulating activities, a brain-training program will probably have little effect on your overall mental functioning,” explains Dr. Germine, “Activities such as reading, participating in a book club, volunteering, helping grandchildren with their homework, or learning a foreign language provide brain challenges that help maintain mental alertness and flexibility without the need for training.
“On the other hand, if you tend to be less intellectually active, you might notice significant mental improvements after spending a half-hour or so each day engaging in computer activities that challenge faculties such as information processing speed, memory, visual-spatial skills and the ability to concentrate.” MMM
The post The Brain-Training Debate Continues appeared first on University Health News.
Read Original Article: The Brain-Training Debate Continues »
Powered by WPeMatico
