Training on Working Memory and Inhibitory Control in Young Adults.

Maria J Maraver,Carlos J Gomez-Ariza,M Teresa Bajo

doi:10.3389/fnhum.2016.00588

Maria J Maraver, Carlos J Gomez-Ariza + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00588

Copy DOI

Abstract

Different types of interventions have focused on trying to improve Executive Functions (EFs) due to their essential role in human cognition and behavior regulation. Although EFs are thought to be diverse, most training studies have targeted cognitive processes related to working memory (WM), and fewer have focused on training other control mechanisms, such as inhibitory control (IC). In the present study, we aimed to investigate the differential impact of training WM and IC as compared with control conditions performing non-executive control activities. Young adults were divided into two training (WM/IC) and two (active/passive) control conditions. Over six sessions, the training groups engaged in three different computer-based adaptive activities (WM or IC), whereas the active control group completed a program with low control-demanding activities that mainly involved processing speed. In addition, motivation and engagement were monitored through the training. The WM-training activities required maintenance, updating and memory search processes, while those from the IC group engaged response inhibition and interference control. All participants were pre- and post-tested in criterion tasks (n-back and Stroop), near transfer measures of WM (Operation Span) and IC (Stop-Signal). Non-trained far transfer outcome measures included an abstract reasoning test (Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices) and a well-validated experimental task (AX-CPT) that provides indices of cognitive flexibility considering proactive/reactive control. Training results revealed that strongly motivated participants reached higher levels of training improvements. Regarding transfer effects, results showed specific patterns of near transfer effects depending on the type of training. Interestingly, it was only the IC training group that showed far transfer to reasoning. Finally, all trained participants showed a shift toward a more proactive mode of cognitive control, highlighting a general effect of training on cognitive flexibility. The present results reveal specific and general modulations of executive control mechanisms after brief training intervention targeting either WM or IC.

Highlights

Executive Functions (EFs) refer to a variety of cognitive and brain mechanisms thought to be in charge of regulating the dynamics of human cognition and behavior in changing environments (Burgess, 1997; Smith and Jonides, 1999; Miyake et al, 2000; Jurado and Rosselli, 2007)
Training on Working Memory and Inhibitory Control variables analyses to show that, despite their unity indicated by shared features, three different EFs emerged from performance in a variety of tasks: (i) Switching, which involves shifting flexibly between tasks or mental sets; (ii) Inhibitory Control (IC), which refers to overriding dominant or prepotent responses; and (iii) Updating of information maintained in Working Memory (WM)
inhibitory control (ICT) Group For the Stroop-like task, the reaction times from 20 participants (10 from ICT and 10 from WMT) were not registered due to a software coding error and they could not be included in the analyses

Summary

Introduction

Executive Functions (EFs) refer to a variety of cognitive and brain mechanisms thought to be in charge of regulating the dynamics of human cognition and behavior in changing environments (Burgess, 1997; Smith and Jonides, 1999; Miyake et al, 2000; Jurado and Rosselli, 2007). As a consequence, training effects would generalize and transfer to non-trained tasks that involve the targeted training domain, and the underlying trained brain areas (near transfer) (Lee et al, 2007; Thorell et al, 2009; Borella et al, 2014; Beauchamp et al, 2016). At the behavioral level, transfer effects could be expected in potentially related cognitive functions, and lead to enhanced performance in a variety tasks that, untrained, share the same cognitive mechanism than the targeted trained processes (Morrison and Chein, 2011). Plenty of studies have found near transfer effects after training WM, IC, or attention, far transfer effects are still limited and inconclusive (Thorell et al, 2009; Spierer et al, 2013; Sprenger et al, 2013; Enge et al, 2014; Schwaighofer et al, 2015; Melby-Lervåg et al, 2016)

Objectives

Results

Conclusion