ArticleMemory & cognition2020
Changes in Error Patterns during N-back Training Indicate Reliance on Subvocal Rehearsal.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differential information transfer and loss between working memory and long-term memory across serial positions.Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition · 2025Article
- Multitasking While Driving: Central Bottleneck or Problem State Interference?Human factors · 2024Article
- Playful Testing of Executive Functions with Yellow-Red: Tablet-Based Battery for Children between 6 and 11.Journal of Intelligence · 2022Article
- Training-induced improvement in working memory tasks results from switching to efficient strategies.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Contemporary cognitive training literature suggests that training on an adaptive task produces improvements only in the trained task or near transfer effects. No study has yet systematically explained the mechanism behind improved performance on the N-back. In this study, we first investigated how improvements in an N-back task using eight pairs of phonologically similar words as stimuli occurred by examining error distributions of the task over training sessions. Nineteen participants (non-native English speakers) trained for 20 sessions over 5 weeks. We observed a reduction in false alarms to non-target words and fewer missed target words. Though the absolute number of phonological-based errors reduced as training progressed, the proportion of this error type did not decrease over time suggesting participants increasingly relied on subvocal rehearsal in completing the N-back. In the second experiment, we evaluated if improvements developed during N-back training transferred to tasks that relied on serial order memory using simple span tasks (letter span with phonologically distinct letters, letter span with phonologically similar letters, digit span forward, and digit span backward). Twenty-nine participants trained on the N-back and 16 trained on the Operation Span (OSPAN) for 15 sessions over 4 weeks. Neither group of participants showed improvements on any of the simple span tasks. In the third experiment, 20 participants (16 native English speakers) trained on the N-back for 15 sessions over 4 weeks also showed increasing reliance on subvocal rehearsal as they progressed through training. Self-report strategy use did not predict improvements on the N-back.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32661910What 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.