This research article and the arstechnica commentary are examples of exactly the overreach that they aim to criticize.
A number of large-scale multi-site randomized controlled trials have shown that specific types of brain training generalize to untrained measures of cognitive function and real-world activities. Here's two examples:
Some brain training works, and some doesn't. Of the ones that work, some show certain types of benefits; and others show other types of benefits. Throwing the whole field out is like saying "laetrile doesn't treat cancer, so no molecules treat cancer."
disclosure: I was an investigator on IMPACT; and I work at a brain training company (Posit Science)
A number of large-scale multi-site randomized controlled trials have shown that specific types of brain training generalize to untrained measures of cognitive function and real-world activities. Here's two examples:
ACTIVE: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3934012/
IMPACT: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4169294/
Some brain training works, and some doesn't. Of the ones that work, some show certain types of benefits; and others show other types of benefits. Throwing the whole field out is like saying "laetrile doesn't treat cancer, so no molecules treat cancer."
disclosure: I was an investigator on IMPACT; and I work at a brain training company (Posit Science)