Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34337311›Full record

ArticleJournal of cognitive enhancement : towards the integration of theory and practice2020

Quantifying the Difference between Active and Passive Control Groups in Cognitive Interventions Using two Meta-Analytical Approaches.

Jacky Au, Benjamin C Gibson, Kimberly Bunarjo, Martin Buschkuehl, Susanne M Jaeggi

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cognitive enhancement : towards the integration of theory and practice, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Effects of virtual walking on neuropathic pain following spinal cord injury: a systematic review.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jacky AuDepartment of Cognitive Sciences, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, 92617.
Benjamin C GibsonDepartment of Psychology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, 87131.
Kimberly BunarjoMIND Research Institute, Irvine, CA, 92617.
Martin BuschkuehlMIND Research Institute, Irvine, CA, 92617.
Susanne M JaeggiDepartment of Cognitive Sciences, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA, 92617.

Funding

Understanding Mediating and Moderating Factors that Determine Transfer of Working Memory TrainingR01MH111742 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE · PI Susanne M Jaeggi, Aaron R Seitz · 2016 to 2026
$5.1M
Working Memory Training in Older AdultsR01AG049006 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI JAEGGI, SUSANNE M · 2015 to 2018
$2.5M
Cognitive Training and Brain Plasticity - Towards an Understanding of Mediators and ModeratorsK02AG054665 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI JAEGGI, SUSANNE M · 2017 to 2021
$806k
NIA NIH HHS K02 AG054665NIA NIH HHS R01 AG049006NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH111742
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite promising reports of broad cognitive benefit in studies of cognitive training, it has been argued that the reliance of many studies on no-intervention control groups (passive controls) make these reports difficult to interpret because placebo effects cannot be ruled out. Although researchers have recently been trying to incorporate more active controls, in which participants engage in an alternate intervention, previous work has been contentious as to whether this actually yields meaningfully different results. To better understand the influence of passive and active control groups on cognitive interventions, we conducted two meta-analyses to estimate their relative effect sizes. While the first one broadly surveyed the literature by compiling data from 34 meta-analyses, the second one synthesized data from 42 empirical studies that simultaneously employed both types of controls. Both analyses showed no meaningful performance difference between passive and active controls, suggesting that current active control placebo paradigms might not be appropriately designed to reliably capture these non-specific effects or that these effects are minimal in this literature.

Indexed as

Cognitive TrainingExperimental ConfoundsHawthorne EffectsMeta-AnalysisPlacebo Effects

Identifiers

PMID34337311
PMCPMC8320766

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.