↓ Skip to main content

Benefits of extending and adjusting the level of difficulty on computerized cognitive training for children with intellectual disabilities

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
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
Benefits of extending and adjusting the level of difficulty on computerized cognitive training for children with intellectual disabilities
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01233
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jon Ottersen, Katja M. Grill

Abstract

Training on working memory (WM) improves attention and WM in children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and memory impairments. However, for children with intellectual disabilities (ID), the results have been less encouraging. In this preliminary study it was hypothesized that children with ID would benefit from an extended amount of training and that the level of difficulty during training would affect the outcome. We included 21 children with mild or moderate ID aged 8-13 years. They went through between 37 and 50 training sessions with an adaptive computerized program on WM and non-verbal reasoning (NVR). The children were divided into two subgroups with different difficulty levels during training. The transfer to untrained cognitive tests was compared to the results of 22 children with ID training only 25 sessions, and to a control group. We found that the training group with the extended training program improved significantly on a block design task measuring NVR and on a WM task compared to the control group. There was also a significantly larger improvement on block design relative to the training group with the shorter training time. The children that received easier training tasks also improved significantly more on a verbal WM task compared to children with more demanding tasks. In conclusion, these preliminary data suggest that children with ID might benefit from cognitive training with longer training periods and less demanding tasks, compared to children without disabilities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 80 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 26%
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Researcher 6 8%
Lecturer 3 4%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 22 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 34%
Neuroscience 9 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 24 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 August 2015.
All research outputs
#18,423,683
of 22,824,164 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,155
of 29,780 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,702
of 265,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#463
of 561 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,824,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,780 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 265,957 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 561 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.