Can cognitive training capitalise on near transfer effects? Limited evidence of transfer following online inhibition training in a randomised-controlled trial

• Published in: PloS one Vol. 18; no. 11; p. e0293657
• Main Authors: Harris, David J, Wilson, Mark R, Chillingsworth, Kieran, Mitchell, Gabriella, Smith, Sarah, Arthur, Tom, Brock, Kirsty, Vine, Samuel J
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: San Francisco Public Library of Science 10-11-2023; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Subjects: Active control; Analysis; Biology and Life Sciences; Clinical trials; Cognition; Cognitive ability; Cognitive tasks; Control tasks; Data collection; Decision making; Engineering and Technology; Evaluation; Human performance; Inhibition (psychology); Memory; Physical Sciences; Python; Questions; Registration; Research and Analysis Methods; Retention; Shoots; Social Sciences; Training; Transfer of training; Visual perception; Visual tasks; United Kingdom
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293657

Despite early promise, cognitive training research has failed to deliver consistent real-world benefits and questions have been raised about the experimental rigour of many studies. Several meta-analyses have suggested that there is little to no evidence for transfer of training from computerised tasks to real-world skills. More targeted training approaches that aim to optimise performance on specific tasks have, however, shown more promising effects. In particular, the use of inhibition training for improving shoot/don't-shoot decision-making has returned positive far transfer effects. In the present work, we tested whether an online inhibition training task could generate near and mid-transfer effects in the context of response inhibition tasks. As there has been relatively little testing of retention effects in the literature to date, we also examined whether any benefits would persist over a 1-month interval. In a pre-registered, randomised-controlled trial, participants (n = 73) were allocated to either an inhibition training programme (six training sessions of a visual search task with singleton distractor) or a closely matched active control task (that omitted the distractor element). We assessed near transfer to a Flanker task, and mid-transfer to a computerised shoot/don't-shoot task. There was evidence for a near transfer effect, but no evidence for mid-transfer. There was also no evidence that the magnitude of training improvement was related to transfer task performance. This finding adds to the growing body of literature questioning the effectiveness of cognitive training. Given previous positive findings, however, there may still be value in continuing to explore the extent to which cognitive training can capitalise on near or mid-transfer effects for performance optimisation.