Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37692193›Full record

ArticleJournal of cognition2023

Unicorn, Hare, or Tortoise? Using Machine Learning to Predict Working Memory Training Performance.

Yi Feng, Anja Pahor, Aaron R Seitz, Dennis L Barbour, Susanne M Jaeggi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cognition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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.

Yi FengUniversity of California, Irvine, School of Education, School of Social Sciences (Department of Cognitive Sciences), Irvine, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2485-9720
Anja PahorUniversity of California, Riverside, Department of Psychology, Riverside, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9396-4620
Aaron R SeitzUniversity of California, Riverside, Department of Psychology, Riverside, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4936-9303
Dennis L BarbourWashington University in St. Louis, Department of Biomedical Engineering, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0851-0665
Susanne M JaeggiUniversity of California, Irvine, School of Education, School of Social Sciences (Department of Cognitive Sciences), Irvine, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6165-2526

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
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 AG054665NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH111742
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

People differ considerably in the extent to which they benefit from working memory (WM) training. Although there is increasing research focusing on individual differences associated with WM training outcomes, we still lack an understanding of which specific individual differences, and in what combination, contribute to inter-individual variations in training trajectories. In the current study, 568 undergraduates completed one of several N-back intervention variants over the course of two weeks. Participants' training trajectories were clustered into three distinct training patterns (high performers, intermediate performers, and low performers). We applied machine-learning algorithms to train a binary tree model to predict individuals' training patterns relying on several individual difference variables that have been identified as relevant in previous literature. These individual difference variables included pre-existing cognitive abilities, personality characteristics, motivational factors, video game experience, health status, bilingualism, and socioeconomic status. We found that our classification model showed good predictive power in distinguishing between high performers and relatively lower performers. Furthermore, we found that openness and pre-existing WM capacity to be the two most important factors in distinguishing between high and low performers. However, among low performers, openness and video game background were the most significant predictors of their learning persistence. In conclusion, it is possible to predict individual training performance using participant characteristics before training, which could inform the development of personalized interventions.

Indexed as

Individual differencesMachine learningWorking memory

Identifiers

PMID37692193
PMCPMC10487130

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.