4.0 Article

Let's go beyond the effect of: Reappraising the impact of ordinary activities on cognition

期刊

PSICOLOGICA
卷 44, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

DIGITAL CSIC
DOI: 10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00161-4

关键词

Cognitive training; dissemination; media; intervention; effect size

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The demands of society for interventions that optimize cognitive abilities and prevent decline have led to the translation of scientific findings into practical programs. Various activities and cognitive programs have been found to have cognitive benefits. However, before drawing implications, several factors need to be considered, including the magnitude and costs of the effect, the robustness of the effect, testing causality, identifying moderator variables, and understanding the underlying mechanisms. These considerations can help researchers critically evaluate existing findings, reduce media overstatements, and potentially guide the design of new interventions.
The demands of today's society for interventions that optimize cognitive abilities and prevent their decline have motivated the translation of scientific findings into applied programs. Ordinary activities such as physical exercise, chess, meditation, playing video games or a musical instrument, as well as specific cognitive programs, have witnessed the growth of evidence emphasizing their cognitive benefits. Here, we outline several issues that need consideration before speculating on the implications of this literature: (a) the magnitude and costs of the effect, (b) the robustness of the effect, (c) testing causality, (d) the identification of moderator variables, and (e) the underlying mechanisms. We consider that this would contribute to a critical appraisal of the extant findings by the interested researchers, to reduce overstatements in the media reports about the applicability and public relevance of the effects reported in scientific articles, and to potentially help designing new interventions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据