Abstract
Computerized cognitive training programs are becoming increasingly popular and practical for cognitive aging. Nevertheless, basic questions remain about the benefits of such programs, and about the degree to which participant expectations might influence training and transfer. Here we examined a commercial cognitive training program (Activate) in a 5-week double-blind, pseudo-randomized placebo-controlled trial. Based on a priori power analysis, we recruited 99 healthy older adults 59-91 years of age (M = 68.87, SD = 6.31; 69 women), assigning them to either the intervention or an active control program (Sudoku and n-back working memory exercises). We subdivided both groups into high and low expectation priming conditions, to probe for effects of participants’ expectations on training and transfer. We assessed transfer using a battery of standard neuropsychological and psychosocial measures that had been agreed to by the training program developers. We planned and pre-registered our analyses (on osf.io). The majority (88%) of participants progressed through the training, and most provided positive feedback about it. Similarly, the majority (80%) of participants believed they were truly training their brains. Yet, transfer of training was minimal. Also minimal were any effects of expectations on training and transfer, although participants who received high expectation priming tended to engage more with their assigned program overall. Our findings suggest limited benefits of Activate training on cognition and psychosocial wellbeing in healthy older adults, at least under the conditions we used.
