ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2016
Seven Pervasive Statistical Flaws in Cognitive Training Interventions.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review on Predictors of Working Memory Training Responsiveness in Healthy Older Adults: Methodological Challenges and Future Directions.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2020Pooled it
- High-intensity training enhances executive function in children in a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.eLife · 2017Trial
- Trial
- Dispelling Myths and Misunderstandings About Defining and Remediating Dyslexia.Dyslexia (Chichester, England) · 2026Review
- From Sensation to Action: Neuroplasticity, Cognitive-Motor Training, and Emerging Biomarkers of Adaptation.Brain sciences · 2026Review
- Mapping differential responses to cognitive training using machine learning.Developmental science · 2020Article
- Perceptions of Brain Training: Public Expectations of Cognitive Benefits From Popular Activities.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2020Article
- What Do People Expect of Cognitive Enhancement?Journal of cognitive enhancement : towards the integration of theory and practice · 2018Article
- Approximate Arithmetic Training Improves Informal Math Performance in Low Achieving Preschoolers.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Article
- WOME: Theory-Based Working Memory Training - A Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind Evaluation in Older Adults.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2018Article
- Effects of physical, virtual reality-based, and brain exercise on physical, cognition, and preference in older persons: a randomized controlled trial.European review of aging and physical activity : official journal of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity · 2018Article
- Evidence of Energetic Optimization during Adaptation Differs for Metabolic, Mechanical, and Perceptual Estimates of Energetic Cost.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Have Standard Tests of Cognitive Function Been Misappropriated in the Study of Cognitive Enhancement?Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2017Review
- Action Observation Plus Sonification. A Novel Therapeutic Protocol for Parkinson's Patient with Freezing of Gait.Frontiers in neurology · 2017Article
- Attentional Filter Training but Not Memory Training Improves Decision-Making.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2017Article
- The Effects of Chess Instruction on Pupils' Cognitive and Academic Skills: State of the Art and Theoretical Challenges.Frontiers in psychology · 2017Article
- Motor-Enriched Learning Activities Can Improve Mathematical Performance in Preadolescent Children.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The prospect of enhancing cognition is undoubtedly among the most exciting research questions currently bridging psychology, neuroscience, and evidence-based medicine. Yet, convincing claims in this line of work stem from designs that are prone to several shortcomings, thus threatening the credibility of training-induced cognitive enhancement. Here, we present seven pervasive statistical flaws in intervention designs: (i) lack of power; (ii) sampling error; (iii) continuous variable splits; (iv) erroneous interpretations of correlated gain scores; (v) single transfer assessments; (vi) multiple comparisons; and (vii) publication bias. Each flaw is illustrated with a Monte Carlo simulation to present its underlying mechanisms, gauge its magnitude, and discuss potential remedies. Although not restricted to training studies, these flaws are typically exacerbated in such designs, due to ubiquitous practices in data collection or data analysis. The article reviews these practices, so as to avoid common pitfalls when designing or analyzing an intervention. More generally, it is also intended as a reference for anyone interested in evaluating claims of cognitive enhancement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.