Q and the EEG was recorded from 19 channels with a linked ears reference in the eyes closed condition from normal control subjects, age 6 to 18 years of age. The correlation to I. These three combined measures give rise to an overall prediction of the efficiency of neural resource allocation. Springer, London, Clark, N.
Boutros and M. Mendez, Cambridge University Press, Localization of Clinical Syndromes in Neuropsychology and Neuroscience. Worker Edition '; document. What is Mental Health? In the moment — as our involuntary fight-flight system detects threats and puts us in a hyper-focused but inflexible state In the long run — as our risk of mental conditions like anxiety and depression cross clinical thresholds. Try Total Brain The Total Brain app is a powerful neuroscience-based mental health and brain performance app that allows users to: self-monitor all 12 brain capacities and risks practice short- and medium-term self-care access professional care when needed measure treatment impact over time With digital neuroscience, brain capacities and risks can be measured, improved and managed — just like physical health.
Gain Insights with Self-Monitoring Learn about your strengths, weaknesses and risks of mental health conditions while monitoring and assessing the impact of self-care programs and treatment. Make Improvements with Self-Care Enhance your mental health and brain performance by utilizing complementary tools for resonant breathing, brain training, positive psychology, meditation and other available assets.
If help is recommended, receive immediate, in-app referrals to third-party health services. Of course, if the tests are of a particular type, this might lead to different outcomes. I could not find any validity data on the website whereby BPI scores are correlated with other measures.
In general, practice effects on cognitive tests are seen as a source of error variance. What a test measures after people have taken the test many times may be very different.
In particular, the degree to which the test correlates with a domain general quality of interest may be reduced. Instead, the test may start to reflect a domain specific adaptation. Also, if people differ in the amount of practice, this would compound the measure of a domain general ability. Overall thoughts : In general, the target market for Lumosity's product seems to be consumers. In the consumer market, it is typical for companies to use "proprietary algorithms" and for there not to be a test manual with extensive validity data.
While this might make commercial sense, it limits the scientific value of such instruments. Because it has been a few years since Jeromy's original answer, and because I just read a very apt article, I will venture an update on the state of the field with respect to the BPI's validity.
Overall, despite more research into brain training and Lumosity, there is little to no peer-reviewed evidence supporting the Lumosity BPI's validity, nor evidence that an average consumer should expect practical cognitive improvements from Lumosity games. A very recent test of the BPI's validity was published by Shute, Ventura and Fe , who compared participants practicing Portal 2 with participants practicing Lumosity games; the Lumosity players served as active controls. Portal 2 measures included 1 total number of levels completed, 2 average number of portals shot, and 3 average time to complete levels; Lumosity was measured by BPI.
They reported no evidence of transfer effects for measures of either problem solving or spatial abilities in the Lumosity condition, and partial support for transfer in the Portal 2 condition only on spatial abilities.
Hypotheses 2 and 3 test pretest to posttest gains on specific problem solving and spatial test scores within each condition.
We computed paired t-tests for each measure in each condition. For hypothesis 2 problem solving gains , we found no significant gains for the Portal 2 condition, from pretest to posttest, for any specific problem solving measure. We also did not find any significant pretest-to-posttest gains for the Lumosity condition across any of the problem solving measures.
Results provide partial support for hypothesis 3 spatial gains. There was no significant improvement for Portal 2 players on the SOT test. For participants in the Lumosity condition, there were no significant pretest-to-posttest improvements on any of the three spatial tests.
A rigorous study by Redick et al. They reported three relevant findings from their own validation study of dual n -back working memory training:.
Our study yielded three main findings. First, subjects improved with practice on both the dual n-back and visual search tasks. Second, training group subjects showed no transfer to any of the ability measures, in keeping with the prediction outlined in Figure 4D. Third, dual n-back trained subjects reported subjective improvements in various aspects of cognition in the absence of any objective evidence for change. The jury is still out on brain training more generally and on when, where and whether it may be useful e.
However, the Lumosity BPI appears to have little to no scientific validity as a cognitive training method for average consumers. Sign up to join this community. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top.
0コメント