Understanding Individual Differences in Working Memory Training and Transfer in Older Adults
NCT ID: NCT05396586
Last Updated: 2025-03-12
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
313 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2022-03-17
2025-03-05
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Adding game-like elements to working memory training programs can increase motivation and engagement, which can increase learning. However this process, termed gamification, adds sensory complexity that can lead to increased mental load and/or distraction in older adults. Investigators hypothesize that gamification of training tasks will be beneficial to some and counterproductive to other participants. The investigators will test two models; the first assumes that participants with difficulty inhibiting distracting information will show better learning and transfer when assigned to non-gamified training, whereas those with more distractor tolerance will show better learning and transfer when assigned to gamified training. The second model states that the outcomes of the intervention will be better predicted by performance on measures of general cognitive ability.
In a separate study, the investigators will compare working memory training that contains rich, multisensory information with a training program that contains only visual information. Here they will also test two models; the first assumes that participants with difficulty binding two stimulus streams will show better learning and transfer when assigned to visual-only working memory training, whereas participants who do not have this difficulty will show better learning and transfer when assigned to multisensory working memory training. The second model states that the outcomes of the intervention will be better predicted by performance on measures of general cognitive ability.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Effectiveness of Cognitive Training in Older and Younger Adults
NCT06375681
Efficacy, Transfer, and Neuro-functional Basis of a Memory Training Targeting Episodic Retrieval in Older Adults.
NCT06110234
Attentional Control Training in Older Adults: Efficacy, Transfer and Brain Substrates
NCT03532113
Effects of Exercise and Cognitive Training on Cognitive Function in Older Adults
NCT01038726
The Effects of Mixed Working Memory Training on Subsequent Training Gains Among Older Adults
NCT05672771
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Each trial involves a total of 50 sessions per participant: the first few sessions consist of completing questionnaires and computerized cognitive assessments (pre-test). Participants then complete 20 sessions of working memory training. After a mid-test, they complete 20 sessions of a different type of working memory training. Post-test is administered upon training completion, and at least a month later, participants complete 3 follow-up sessions. The study can be administered either in person or remotely; however, the investigators anticipate that most participants will complete the study remotely.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
CROSSOVER
BASIC_SCIENCE
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Condition 1
Training type 1 will be administered in the first part of the crossover trial and Training type 2 will be administered in the second part of the trial. Each training part consists of 20 twenty-minute long sessions with the recommended frequency of 2 sessions per work day. Thus each training part can be completed in 10 work days (2 weeks).
N-back
The training program is a personal device-based adaptive version of a visual N-back task, either devoid of game elements or embedded in a gamified platform game
Span
The training program is a personal device-based adaptive version of a visual working memory span task, either devoid of game elements or embedded in a gamified platform game
Multisensory
The training program is a personal device-based adaptive version of an N-back task that features visual stimuli (Unisensory) or visual stimuli paired with unique sounds (Multisensory) and is devoid of game elements
Condition 2
Training type 2 will be administered in the first part of the crossover trial and Training type 1 will be administered in the second part of the trial. Each training part consists of 20 twenty-minute long sessions with the recommended frequency of 2 sessions per work day. Thus each training part can be completed in 10 work days (2 weeks).
N-back
The training program is a personal device-based adaptive version of a visual N-back task, either devoid of game elements or embedded in a gamified platform game
Span
The training program is a personal device-based adaptive version of a visual working memory span task, either devoid of game elements or embedded in a gamified platform game
Multisensory
The training program is a personal device-based adaptive version of an N-back task that features visual stimuli (Unisensory) or visual stimuli paired with unique sounds (Multisensory) and is devoid of game elements
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
N-back
The training program is a personal device-based adaptive version of a visual N-back task, either devoid of game elements or embedded in a gamified platform game
Span
The training program is a personal device-based adaptive version of a visual working memory span task, either devoid of game elements or embedded in a gamified platform game
Multisensory
The training program is a personal device-based adaptive version of an N-back task that features visual stimuli (Unisensory) or visual stimuli paired with unique sounds (Multisensory) and is devoid of game elements
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Able to understand and speak English and follow study procedures
* Does not have a psychological or neurological condition that would prevent being able to give consent to participate
* Not currently involved in any other cognitive or memory training studies
Exclusion Criteria
* A final total score below 17 on Montreal Cognitive Assessment - Blind (telephone) version.
* Score of 10 or more on the Generalized Anxiety Questionnaire (GAD7; Spitzer et al., 2006, Archives of Internal Medicine), indicating presence of moderate or severe anxiety
* Score of 9 or more on Geriatric depression scale (GDS15; Yesavage et al., 1982) indicating presence of moderate or severe depression
* Abnormal visual acuity prohibitive of tablet-based training.
* Physical handicap (motor or perceptual) that would impede training procedures.
* Medical illness requiring treatment and/or significant absences during the study timeline.
* Current evidence or 2-yr history of seizures, focal brain lesion, or head injury with loss of consciousness.
* Current alcohol consumption exceeds 14 drinks per week.
* Self-reported illicit drug use.
50 Years
85 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of California, Riverside
OTHER
National Institute on Aging (NIA)
NIH
Northeastern University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Susanne Jaeggi
Assistant Project Scientist
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Aaron R Seitz, Phd
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of California, Riverside
Susanne M Jaeggi, Phd
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of California, Irvine
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University of California, Irvine
Irvine, California, United States
University of California, Riverside
Riverside, California, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Pahor A, Mester RE, Carrillo AA, Ghil E, Reimer JF, Jaeggi SM, Seitz AR. UCancellation: A new mobile measure of selective attention and concentration. Behav Res Methods. 2022 Oct;54(5):2602-2617. doi: 10.3758/s13428-021-01765-5. Epub 2022 Feb 1.
Pahor A, Stavropoulos T, Jaeggi SM, Seitz AR. Validation of a matrix reasoning task for mobile devices. Behav Res Methods. 2019 Oct;51(5):2256-2267. doi: 10.3758/s13428-018-1152-2.
Royle J, Lincoln NB. The Everyday Memory Questionnaire-revised: development of a 13-item scale. Disabil Rehabil. 2008;30(2):114-21. doi: 10.1080/09638280701223876.
Pahor A, Collins C, Smith RN, Moon A, Stavropoulos T, Silva I, Peng E, Jaeggi SM, Seitz AR. Multisensory Facilitation of Working Memory Training. J Cogn Enhanc. 2021 Sep;5(3):386-395. doi: 10.1007/s41465-020-00196-y. Epub 2020 Nov 27.
Sandeep S, Shelton CR, Pahor A, Jaeggi SM, Seitz AR. Application of Machine Learning Models for Tracking Participant Skills in Cognitive Training. Front Psychol. 2020 Jul 22;11:1532. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01532. eCollection 2020.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.