Is working memory training effective?

Engle, Randall W · 2012 · OpenAlex

DOI: 10.1037/a0027473

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This review paper critically evaluates the efficacy of working memory (WM) training, addressing the growing claim that prolonged training on WM tasks can produce broad cognitive improvements, including increased fluid intelligence and reduced ADHD symptoms. The authors argue that while WM is central to general cognition, the current literature lacks rigorous evidence that training actually increases underlying WM capacity rather than merely improving performance on specific tasks. The review is motivated by concerns that many studies rely on flawed methodologies and theoretical assumptions that conflate task-specific learning with genuine cognitive enhancement. The authors analyze the WM training literature by first distinguishing between short-term memory (STM) and WM, emphasizing that valid WM measurement requires tasks involving both storage and processing, such as complex span tasks. They identify four primary methodological flaws in existing training studies: (1) defining ability changes using single tasks rather than multiple measures to isolate latent abilities; (2) inconsistent use of valid WM tasks, often employing simple span or n-back tasks whose relationship to WM capacity is debated; (3) the use of no-contact control groups, which fails to account for practice effects and maturation; and (4) reliance on subjective measures of change. The review examines various training paradigms, particularly adaptive training programs that adjust difficulty based on performance, and evaluates claims of "near transfer" (improvement on similar WM tasks) and "far transfer" (improvement on unrelated cognitive abilities like reasoning or attention). The findings indicate that while participants often show improved performance on trained tasks, this does not necessarily demonstrate an increase in WM capacity. The authors highlight that single-task improvements can be explained by strategy acquisition or task-specific familiarity rather than general cognitive change. For instance, they note that improvements in fluid intelligence reported in some studies may stem from better handling of specific test formats rather than enhanced reasoning ability. The review concludes that there is insufficient evidence to support the claim that WM training leads to broad cognitive benefits. Specifically, the authors argue that transfer effects have not been robustly demonstrated using a variety of tasks to rule out task-specific learning, and that promising results regarding intelligence or attention cannot be readily attributed to changes in WM capacity. The significance of this work lies in its call for stricter methodological standards in cognitive training research. The authors conclude that future studies must directly demonstrate increases in WM capacity using multiple, diverse tasks to ensure that observed effects reflect genuine changes in underlying abilities rather than superficial learning. They emphasize the need to uncover the mechanisms that lead to valid transfer and caution against the commercial promotion of WM training programs that lack empirical support for their broad claims. This critique aims to refine the field by separating genuine cognitive enhancement from placebo effects and task-specific practice benefits.

Key finding

Current evidence does not sufficiently demonstrate that working memory training leads to genuine increases in working memory capacity or broad cognitive transfer, as results are likely confounded by task-specific learning and methodological limitations.

Methodology

review

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed. Discovered via openalex_abstract on 2026-05-08 (3 acquisition events logged).

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• cognitive capacity variation