Chapter: "Individual Differences in Cognitive Training Research"

​Alumna Maria (Masha) R. Jones (Ph.D. ’19, pictured left), and Associate Professor Susanne M. Jaeggi (pictured right) contributed a chapter in the new publication Cognitive Training, An Overview of Features and Applications.
 
The title of their chapter is “Individual Differences in Cognitive Training Research.”
 
Co-authors are Benjamin Katz (first author, University of Michigan), Priti Shah (University of Michigan), and Martin Buschkuehl (MIND Institute).

Jones is a Research Associate at WestEd, focusing on education policy. Her research interests include executive functions, reading, ADHD, learning, disabilities, and motivation. For her doctoral work, Jones specialized in Language, Literacy, and Technology. Jones’s dissertation work explored how individual differences in executive functions and meta-cognitive factors play a role in the lives of children with learning and attention disorders. Dr. Jaeggi served as her advisor.

Jaeggi researches training and transfer, individual differences in working memory capacity and executive control, as well as the nature of working memory limitations across the lifespan. She directs UCI's Working Memory and Plasticity (WMP) Lab. Jaeggi is a fellow of the Center for the Neurobiology of Learning and Memory and holds a courtesy appointment in the Department of Cognitive Sciences in UCI's School of Social Sciences.

Abstract
 
Asking whether a cognitive training program “works” does less to further research in the field than asking why a participant does or does not improve on training or transfer measures following the intervention. To better understand the divergent results between many cognitive training studies, it is likely necessary to investigate the individual difference factors that might influence the outcome of training. The present chapter covers a range of factors that have been examined in cognitive training research, including baseline performance, age, motivation, personality, and socioeconomic status. While baseline performance and age have received the most attention, a growing body of cognitive training studies have incorporated other individual difference factors in their analyses as well. Given this development, we include a discussion of how researchers might more effectively incorporate individual difference variables into their studies. Continued, high quality research into the role of these factors in the outcome of training remains an important step in developing training interventions that are broadly effective for individuals from a variety of backgrounds.