The Evidence on Teaching

Working Memory Training Does Not Improve Performance on Measures of Intelligence or Other Measures of "Far Transfer": Evidence From a Meta-Analytic Review

Melby-Lervag M, Redick TS, Hulme C · 2016

grade Bmeta-analysisindependentunreplicated
Sample
87 publications, 145 experimental comparisons
Population
Children and adults, typical and clinical samples
Design
The decisive methodological move is restricting far-transfer inference to comparisons against TREATED (active) control conditions, which strips out expectancy and contact effects. Also runs a mediation analysis linking size of WM gain to size of far transfer, and a publication-bias analysis.
Key findings
Reliable intermediate transfer to verbal and visuospatial working memory immediately after training. No convincing evidence of far transfer (non-verbal ability, verbal ability, word decoding, reading comprehension, arithmetic) against treated controls. Degree of improvement on the WM measures did NOT predict far transfer - the proposed mechanism does not operate. Publication-bias analysis indicates the treated-control studies have no evidential value.
Genetic confound
Low. Randomised contrasts with active controls.

Effects

OutcomeMetricValueMeasureTimingVsHorizonClass
Verbal and visuospatial working memory (intermediate transfer)pooled effectreliable immediate improvementstandardizedimmediately post-trainingactive-alternativeend-of-treatmentnear-transfer
Non-verbal ability, verbal ability, decoding, reading comprehension, arithmetic (far transfer)pooled effect vs treated controlsno convincing evidence of any reliable improvementstandardizedpost-trainingactive-alternativeend-of-treatmentfar-transfer
WM gain as mediator of far transfermediationnot related - mechanism unsupportedstandardizedpost-trainingactive-alternativeend-of-treatmentfar-transfer

Cited by