Cognitive neuroscience research online

As I mentioned in Neuroscience Conference 2007, we recently presented evidence that the Lumosity application is not only an effective way to improve cognition, but it is also a useful platform for conducting basic research. The following is an abridged version of the “lay language summary” the Society for Neuroscience asked us to provide for the science press. The summary was co-authored by Lizzie Buchen, one of our science advisors.

Using the Web for Behavioral Research and Intervention: Evidence from Cognitive Training
We have found that a web-based application can be used to efficiently perform human behavioral intervention, and may provide a powerful platform for conducting large-scale human cognition experiments. In a test experiment, subjects who participated in a 30-day online cognitive training program, “Lumosity,” significantly improved in measures of memory and attention. Importantly, the web-based format allowed us to perform the intervention entirely over the internet, including subject recruitment, behavioral testing and training, and data collection and analysis.

After validating the efficacy of the training program and its feasibility as a research platform, we launched collaborations with other human behavior researchers interested in this novel form of intervention. Because the platform is substantially cheaper and less resource-intensive than non-web-based interventions, and its accessibility can improve subjects’ enjoyment and compliance, we found it in high demand among cognitive scientists. These experiments are currently in progress. (continued…)

Continue Reading »

Even YOU can get smarter

By contributing author Aimee Fountain, who splits her time between Lumos Labs and teaching at American River College.

According to an article published by Carol Dweck in the journal Educational Leadership, the type of praise students get is very much a factor in how they view their intelligence. And, how students view their intelligence is very much connected to their academic performance over time.

Students who were continually praised for being smart thought that intelligence was a fixed trait that they couldn’t do anything to affect, and which would manifest itself (or not) regardless of the effort put into a particular endeavor. Students who were praised for their efforts, on the other hand, associated their success with the amount of work they put in and, thus, concluded that their level of intelligence was malleable and dependent on their continued development and willingness to learn.

Students who believed that their intelligence was innate were inclined towards activities that would confirm or show-off their intelligence and avoided those activities which required effort. However, students who believed in the power of work to increase ability were much more likely to take on challenges and persist through them. The first group was also more likely to hide or lie about mistakes and deficiencies than the second group, which was inclined to correct them. Research in psychology and neuroscience supports this second group of students with evidence suggesting that the brain is really quite malleable and adaptive.

We get a lot of inquiries from people asking how their Lumosity scores stack up against the rest of the world (sound familiar? “How smart am I really?”). Thing is, when it comes to brain exercise, it doesn’t really matter how your score compares to others’. Instead, we hope that everyone plays to improve him/herself rather than to reconfirm or undermine his/her intelligence identity. A challenging curriculum should be viewed as an opportunity for growth and for developing new learning strategies.

Harness your growth potential! Intellectual development is not the natural unfolding of a finite amount of smarts!

Note added on November 29: For more on the topic of maximizing learning potential, see Scientific American’s December 2007 article The Secret to Raising Smart Kids.

See: Dweck, Carol S. Educational Leadership, October 2007 | Volume 65 | Number 2: Early Intervention at Every Age. ‘The Perils and Promises of Praise,” Pages 34-39.

Attention keeps your brain from overflowing

Elizabeth Buchen, neuroscientist, science writer and advisor to Lumos Labs, explains human attention in engrossing eloquence. Visit Madam Fathom to read more about the biological basis of mind.

The world offers an awesome, indescribably magnificent profusion of sensory riches. For our meager mortal brains, however, trying to process this deluge of information is akin to taking a drink from Iguaçu Falls: it’s tremendously inefficient, and you will likely be violently ripped from your precipice and vanish in a ferocious torrent of natural wonder.

Because the world is too rich for our brains to process at once (or even in a lifetime), we are equipped with mechanisms that restrict the avalanche of information to a manageable trickle…

Continue Reading »

IQ is affected by upbringing

The oldest child in a family tends to have a higher IQ than their siblings. While this difference is not huge (about 3 IQ points) and is not true in every case, it brings up interesting questions about what causes the difference. Is the first-born exposed to a more favorable chemical environment in utero? Or does the older sibling experience a social environment after birth that leads to higher IQ?

In the most recent issue of Science, Norwegian researchers reported that IQ levels are actually dependent on social rank within the family. They found that when the 2nd-born was brought up as the oldest child due to the older sibling’s death, the resulting average IQ score increased to that of a first-born.

An important takeaway from this research is that IQ is not genetically or developmentally fixed at birth. While genes almost certainly play an important role in intelligence, we see that environment and lifestyle can change level of intelligence. Hint-hint, nudge: go get smart with the Lumosity exercises. Or…

Time of day effects on cognition

Several years ago, researchers were testing the cognitive abilities of a group of college students and senior citizens. During their initial data collection, most of which was done at night, they found that the college students significantly out-performed the seniors.

Then they started testing the groups at 8am. Suddenly the college students were doing worse, and the seniors much better. It became clear that cognitive prowess is related to time of day. One explanation is that the sleep cycle of the two groups is very different. At 8am, most college students are barely awake or responsive. Robert West et al suggested the groups have a different alertness cycle, and found that time of day affects working memory and executive function differently in the young and old.

Our Poll
I recently did an informal poll to see if our readers have personally observed differences in their performance across the day. In response to “During what part of the day does your brain function best?”:

44% Morning
33% Late night
22% Afternoon
0% said Same All Day or After Dinner
18 people responded (this is not a very popular blog yet!)

An immediate take-away is that everyone who responded felt that they perform best at a certain time of day. I would need more respondents to interpret if there is an overall favorite time, but “After Dinner” is emerging as the least favorite period for cognitive crunching. This may be due to the body’s need to start digesting that food, which involves the autonomic nervous system moving more blood to the digestive system, and a resulting reduction in alertness.

Since time of day has a significant impact on cognition, it would be prudent to schedule important or demanding tasks for times when we’re sharpest. Professional acquaintances may now have a better understanding of why I never want to meet in the morning…