Lucertis Kinder- en Jeugdpsychiatrie, Max Euwelaan 70, 3062 MA Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Radboud University Nijmegen, Behavioural Science Institute, Montessorilaan 3, 6525 HR Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Radboud University Nijmegen, Behavioural Science Institute, Montessorilaan 3, 6525 HR Nijmegen, The Netherlands; Koninklijke Kentalis, Theerestraat 42, 5271 GD Sint-Michielsgestel, The Netherlands.
Neuropsychologia. 2018 May;113:140-149. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.04.002. Epub 2018 Apr 5.
The goal of the present study was to test whether the amount of coaching influenced the results of working memory training on both visual and verbal working memory. Additionally, the effects of the working memory training on the amount of progress after specific training in mathematics were evaluated. In this study, 23 children between 9 and 12 years of age with both attentional and mathematical difficulties participated in a working memory training program with a high amount of coaching, while another 25 children received no working memory training. Results of these groups were compared to 21 children who completed the training with a lower amount of coaching. The quality of working memory, as well as mathematic skills, were measured three times using untrained transfer tasks. Bayesian statistics were used to test informative hypotheses. After receiving working memory training, the highly coached group performed better than the group that received less coaching on visual working memory and mathematics, but not on verbal working memory. The highly coached group retained their advantage in mathematics, even though the effect on visual working memory decreased. However, no added effect of working memory training was found on the learning curve during mathematical training. Moreover, the less-coached group was outperformed by the group that did not receive working memory training, both in visual working memory and mathematics. These results suggest that motivation and proper coaching might be crucial for ensuring compliance and effects of working memory training, and that far transfer might be possible.
本研究的目的是检验指导的数量是否会影响视觉和言语工作记忆训练的结果。此外，还评估了工作记忆训练对特定数学训练后进步程度的影响。在这项研究中，23 名 9 至 12 岁的儿童，他们存在注意力和数学方面的困难，参加了一个具有高指导量的工作记忆训练计划，而另外 25 名儿童则没有接受工作记忆训练。这些组的结果与完成训练的 21 名儿童进行了比较，他们的训练指导量较低。使用未经训练的转移任务，三次测量工作记忆的质量和数学技能。使用贝叶斯统计来测试信息性假设。接受工作记忆训练后，接受高指导的组在视觉工作记忆和数学方面的表现优于接受较少指导的组，但在言语工作记忆方面则不然。高指导组在数学方面保持了优势，尽管视觉工作记忆的效果有所下降。然而，在数学训练期间的学习曲线上，没有发现工作记忆训练的附加效果。此外，接受较少指导的组在视觉工作记忆和数学方面都不如未接受工作记忆训练的组。这些结果表明，动机和适当的指导可能是确保工作记忆训练的依从性和效果的关键，并且可能存在远迁移。
