↓ Skip to main content

Brain training in progress: a review of trainability in healthy seniors

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
113 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
284 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Brain training in progress: a review of trainability in healthy seniors
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00183
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jessika I. V. Buitenweg, Jaap M. J. Murre, K. Richard Ridderinkhof

Abstract

The cognitive deterioration associated with aging is accompanied by structural alterations and loss of functionality of the frontostriatal dopamine system. The question arises how such deleterious cognitive effects could be countered. Brain training, currently highly popular among young and old alike, promises that users will improve on certain neurocognitive skills, and this has indeed been confirmed in a number of studies. Based on these results, it seems reasonable to expect beneficial effects of brain training in the elderly as well. A selective review of the existing literature suggests, however, that the results are neither robust nor consistent, and that transfer and sustained effects thus far appear limited. Based on this review, we argue for a series of elements that hold potential for progress in successful types of brain training: (1) including flexibility and novelty as features of the training, (2) focusing on a number of promising, yet largely unexplored domains, such as decision-making and memory strategy training, and (3) tailoring the training adaptively to the level and progress of the individual. We also emphasize the need for covariance-based MRI methods in linking structural and functional changes in the aging brain to individual differences in neurocognitive efficiency and trainability in order to further uncover the underlying mechanisms.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 284 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 2%
Germany 4 1%
Sweden 3 1%
Canada 2 <1%
Poland 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Other 3 1%
Unknown 259 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 60 21%
Researcher 45 16%
Student > Master 45 16%
Student > Bachelor 24 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 5%
Other 55 19%
Unknown 40 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 131 46%
Neuroscience 34 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 6%
Social Sciences 7 2%
Other 25 9%
Unknown 50 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 47. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 November 2019.
All research outputs
#753,747
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#357
of 7,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,616
of 244,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#22
of 294 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,115 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 244,088 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 294 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.