Skip to main content

No Evidence for Expectation Effects in Cognitive Training Tasks

Abstract

A great deal of recent empirical and theoretical work has examined whether it is possible to enhance cognitive functioning via behavioral (cognitive) training. While a growing body of research provides support for such a hypothesis, multiple critiques of the field have suggested that any positive findings in the field to date may be due to placebo effects, rather than reflecting “true” benefits of the training paradigms. Here, in a series of four experiments, we sought to purposefully induce placebo effects of this type in cognitive training-style setup. We did so in multiple outcome domains (fluid intelligence; spatial skills), employed multiple types of “training” paradigms (classic cognitive training using the N-back working memory task; the video game Tetris) and critically, combined explicit verbal instructions that participants in some groups “should expect to improve their performance after completing their training with associative learning “evidence” that such improvements were occurring (via manipulated task designs). In no case, though, was a placebo effect observed. These results collectively provide evidence against the contention that placebo effects are a major driver of positive outcomes previously attributed to cognitive training interventions.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig 5

Data Availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. These datasets along with all final analysis code will be uploaded to an open-data repository upon publication.

References

  1. Au, J., Sheehan, E., Tsai, N., Duncan, G. J., Buschkuehl, M., & Jaeggi, S. M. (2015). Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(2), 366–377. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0699-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ball, K., Berch, D. B., Helmers, K. F., Jobe, J. B., Leveck, M. D., Marsiske, M., ..., Group, A. S (2002). Effects of cognitive training interventions with older adults: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 288(18), 2271-2281.

  3. Bandura, A., Grusec, J. E., & Menlove, F. L. (1966). Observational learning as a function of symbolization and incentive set. Child Development, 37(3), 499–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bavelier, D., Bediou, B., & Green, C. S. (2018). Expertise and generalization: lessons from action video games. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2018.01.012.

  5. Bediou, B., Adams, D. M., Mayer, R. E., Tipton, E., Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2018). Meta-analysis of action video game impact on perceptual, attentional. and cognitive skills. Psychological Bulletin, 144(1), 77–110. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000130.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Boot, W. R., Simons, D. J., Stothart, C., & Stutts, C. (2013). The pervasive problem with placebos in psychology: why active control groups are not sufficient to rule out placebo effects. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(4), 445–454. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691613491271.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Büchel, C., Geuter, S., Sprenger, C., & Eippert, F. (2014). Placebo analgesia: a predictive coding perspective. Neuron, 81, 1223–1239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2014.02.042.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Colloca, L., Klinger, R., Flor, H., & Bingel, U. (2013). Placebo analgesia: psychological and neurobiological mechanisms. Pain, 154(4), 511–514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2013.02.002.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Denkinger, S., Spano, L., Bingel, U., Witt, C.M., Bavelier, D. & Green, C.S. (in press). Assessing the impact of expectations in cognitive training and beyond. Journal of Cognitive Enhancement.

  10. Deveau, J., Jaeggi, S. M., Zordan, V., Phung, C., & Seitz, A. R. (2014a). How to build better memory training games. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 8, 243. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnsys.2014.00243.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Deveau, J., Ozer, D. J., & Seitz, A. R. (2014b). Improved vision and on-field performance in baseball through perceptual learning. Current Biology, 24(4), R146–R147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2014.01.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: the new psychology of success. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Foroughi, C. K., Monfort, S. S., Paczynski, M., McKnight, P. E., & Greenwood, P. M. (2016). Placebo effects in cognitive training. PNAS, 113, 7470–7474. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1601243113.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Green, C. S., Strobach, T., & Schubert, T. (2014). On methodological standards in training and transfer experiments. Psychological Research, 78(6), 756–772. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-013-0535-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Green, C. S., Bavelier, D., Kramer, A. F., Vinogradov, S., Ansorge, U., Ball, K. K., ..., Witt, C. M. (2019). Improving methodological standards in behavioral interventions for cognitive enhancement. Journal of Cognitive Enhancement, 3(1), 2-29.

  16. Hrobjartsson, A., Forfang, E., Haahr, M. T., Als-Nielsen, B., & Brorson, S. (2007). Blinded trials taken to the test: an analysis of randomized clinical trials that report tests for the success of blinding. International Journal of Epidemiology, 36(3), 654–663. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dym020.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Jeffreys, H. (1961). Theory of probability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Jones, M. R., Katz, B., Buschkuehl, M., Jaeggi, S. M., & Shah, P. (2018). Exploring N-back cognitive training for children with ADHD. Journal of Attention Disorders. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054718779230.

  19. Kaptchuk, T. J., & Miller, F. G. (2015). Placebo effects in medicine. The New England Journal of Medicine, 373(1), 8–9. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1504023.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Karbach, J., & Unger, K. (2014). Executive control training from middle childhood to adolescence. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 390. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00390.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Katz, B., Jaeggi, S. M., Buschkuehl, M., Shah, P., & Jonides, J. (2018). The effect of monetary compensation on cognitive training outcomes. Learning and Motivation, 63, 77–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Klingberg, T., Fernell, E., Olesen, P. J., Johnson, M., Gustafsson, P., Dahlstrom, K., ... Westerberg, H. (2005). Computerized training of working memory in children with ADHD- a randomized, controlled trial. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 44(2), 177-186.

  23. Kramer, A. F., Larish, J., & Strayer, D. L. (1995). Training for attentional control in dual-task settings: a comparison of young and old adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1, 50–76.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Melby-Lervag, M., & Hulme, C. (2013). Is working memory training effective? A meta-analytic review. Developmental Psychology, 49(2), 270–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Morey, R. D., Rouder, J. N., Jamil, T., Urbanek, S., Forner, K., & Ly, A. (2018 ). Computation of Bayes factors for common designs.

  26. Nahum, M., Lee, H., & Merzenich, M. M. (2013). Principles of neuroplasticity-based rehabilitation. Progress in Brain Research, 207, 141–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-63327-9.00009-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Pahor, A., Stavropoulos, T., Jaeggi, S. M., & Seitz, A. R. (2018). Validation of a matrix reasoning task for mobile devices. Behavior Research Methods doi. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1152-2.

  28. Prakash, R. S., De Leon, A. A., Patterson, B., Schirda, B. L., & Janssen, A. L. (2014). Mindfulness and the aging brain: a proposed paradigm shift. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 6, 120. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2014.00120.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Price, D. D., Finniss, D. G., & Benedetti, F. (2008). A comprehensive review of the placebo effect: recent advances and current thought. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 565–590. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.113006.095941.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Rabipour, S., Morrison, C., Crompton, J., Petrucelli, M., de Oliveira Gonçalves Germano, M., Popescu, A., & Davidson, P. S. R. (2019). Few effects of a 5-week adaptive computerized cognitive training program in healthy older adults. Journal of Cognitive Enhancement. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-019-00147-2.

  31. Rohde, T. E., & Thompson, L. A. (2007). Predicting academic achievement with cognitive ability. Intelligence, 35(1), 83–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Schlickum, M. K., Hedman, L., Enochsson, L., Kjellin, A., & Fellander-Tsai, L. (2009). Systematic video game training in surgical novices improves performance in virtual reality endoscopic surgical simulators: a prospective randomized study. World Journal of Surgery, 33(11), 2360–2367.

  33. Schmiedek, F., Lövdén, M., & Lindenberger, U. (2010). Hundred days of cognitive training enhance broad abilities in adulthood: findings from the COGITO study. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 2, 27.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Shipstead, Z., Hicks, K. L., & Engle, R. W. (2012a). Cogmed working memory training: does the evidence support the claims? Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1, 185–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Shipstead, Z., Redick, T. S., & Engle, R. W. (2012b). Is working memory training effective? Psychological Bulletin, 138(4), 623–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Simons, D. J., Boot, W. R., Charness, N., Gathercole, S. E., Chabris, C. F., Hambrick, D. Z., & Stine-Morrow, E. A. (2016). Do “brain-training” programs work? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 17(3), 103–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100616661983.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Stieff, M., & Uttal, D. (2015). How much can spatial training improve STEM achievement. Educational Psychology Review, 27(4), 607–615.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Strobach, T., & Karbach, J. (Eds.). (2016). Cognitive training: an overview of features and applications. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Tsai, N., Buschkuehl, M., Kamarsu, S., Shah, P., Jonides, J., & Jaeggi, S. M. (2018). (Un)Great expectations: the role of placebo effects in cognitive training. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 7(4), 564–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Tuttle, A. H., Tohyama, S., Ramsay, T., Kimmelman, J., Schweinhardt, P., Bennett, G. J., & Mogil, J. S. (2015). Increasing placebo responses over time in U.S. clinical trials of neuropathic pain. Pain, 156(12), 2616–2626. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000333.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Uttal, D. H., Meadow, N. G., Tipton, E., Hand, L. L., Alden, A. R., Warren, C., & Newcombe, N. S. (2013a). The malleability of spatial skills: a meta-analysis of training studies. Psychological Bulletin, 139(2), 352–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Uttal, D. H., Miller, D. I., & Newcombe, N. S. (2013b). Exploring and enhancing spatial thinking: links to achievement in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22(5), 367–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Valdes, E. G., Andel, R., Lister, J. J., Gamaldo, A., & Edwards, J. D. (2017). Can cognitive speed of processing training improve everyday functioning among older adults with psychometrically defined mild cognitive impairment? Journal of Aging and Health, 31(4), 595–610. 898264317738828. https://doi.org/10.1177/0898264317738828.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Voudouris, N. J., Peck, C. L., & Coleman, G. (1985). Conditioned placebo responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(1), 47–53.

  45. Wabersich, D., & Vandekerckhove, J. (2014). The RWiener package: an R package providing distribution functions for the Wiener diffusion model. The Royal Journal, 6(1), 49–56.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Wagenmakers, E. J. (2007). A practical solution to the pervasive problems of p values. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 14(5), 779–804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Wetzels, R., Matzke, D., Lee, M. D., Rouder, J. N., Iverson, G. J., & Wagenmakers, E. J. (2011). Statistical evidence in experimental psychology: an empirical comparison using 855 t tests. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(3), 291–298. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691611406923.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Wright, R., Thompson, W. L., Ganis, G., Newcombe, N. S., & Kosslyn, S. M. (2008). Training generalized spatial skills. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15(4), 763–771.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The project was partially supported by Office of Naval Research grant N00014-17-1-2049 to C.S.G.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

M.V., A.Corriveau, A.Cochrane, and C.S.G. contributed to the development of the methods, procedures, and core hypotheses. M.V., A.Corriveau, and Z.D. took primary responsibility for data collection. A.Cochrane took primary responsibility for data analysis, with contributions from the remainder of the author list. All authors contributed to the writing of the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Shawn Green.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics Approval

All studies described here were approved by the University of Wisconsin-Madison Education and Social/Behavioral IRB.

Consent to Participate

All participants provided informed consent to participate in the studies described here.

Consent to Publish

Participants granted their consent to publish data, in the format utilized in the current manuscript, as part of the full informed consent process.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

ESM 1

(DOCX 23 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vodyanyk, M., Cochrane, A., Corriveau, A. et al. No Evidence for Expectation Effects in Cognitive Training Tasks. J Cogn Enhanc 5, 296–310 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41465-021-00207-6

Download citation

Keywords

  • Cognitive training
  • Expectation effects
  • Placebo effects
  • Behavioral interventions