
Professors create free research-backed games to train your brain - hhs
http://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2020/january/train-your-brain.html
======
kranner
Game 3 (All you can E.T.) which I just installed is 267.7MB on iOS, for what
looks and plays like a flash game. The Android version is 39MB, so they should
probably compress their textures or something in the iOS build.

Looks like it was built with minimal playtesting. Took me a couple tries to
figure out how to play, for which I had to read the article.

On initial launch the game asks if the user is OK with their data being
collected for research, but the 'No thanks' button/label is too tiny and too
close to the large 'YES' button. I had meant to choose 'No thanks' but I think
I clicked 'YES.

~~~
AlchemistCamp
> _" On initial launch the game asks if the user is OK with their data being
> collected for research, but the 'No thanks' button/label is too tiny and too
> close to the large 'YES' button. I had meant to choose 'No thanks' but I
> think I clicked 'YES."_

Perhaps with more traning, your brain will be better at helping you avoid
aggressive 'YES' buttons :)

~~~
russler23
That sounds plausible, but a little speculative. Perhaps a follow-up study is
in order?

------
codeulike
_So far, no solid research has been able to show that brain training exercises
change your thinking or behavior in measureable ways once you leave the
smartphone screen_

[https://www.inverse.com/article/34018-lumosity-brain-
trainin...](https://www.inverse.com/article/34018-lumosity-brain-training-
games-does-it-work)

~~~
hrktb
Interesting, and I also remember similar results from other studies, where
essentially playing the game would make the subjects better at the game with
no other provable benefit.

Now, the control for these experiments was amusing:

for one of the sessions:

> which played regular, dumb computer games

What would be a 'dumb' game is fascinating.

You'd have to find something that provokes no brain stimulation at all, no
skill evolution while still being a game. Then if the 'game' was really
completely void of content but the players kept playing it, would they end up
in a kind o meditative state, potentially causing their abilities to increase
?

Another control group were doing crosswords, I guess to get a "well known
quantity", but aren't crosswords also pretty demanding games depending on the
people doing it? I'd be worse at crossword than building raiding strategies in
an RPG for instance.

Somewhere I have the feeling these studies are deeply flawed with a lot of
unchecked assumptions. Not by laziness per se, but it just seems that
cognitive fields are inherently hard for rigorous studies.

~~~
codeulike
Right, but then if 'Brain training' games are shown to be no different from
other games that dont have that label then the label is still revealed to be
bullshit.

------
ArtWomb
Simply put, I don't think the engagement is there with the entire genre of
"brain training" games. They don't feel like "play" in the same way that one
could easily slip into Stardew Valley and lose hours at a sitting. Forcing
oneself to interact for 30 minutes a day is not feasible. Even if the benefits
were are as palpable as actual exercise.

Contrast with the "Math AR" tool GeoGebra. The interface is not perfect yet.
But it does give a glimpse at what a truly interactive geometry lesson would
look like. As well as a medium that invites life-long learning ;)

[https://www.geogebra.org/](https://www.geogebra.org/)

~~~
grawprog
I'm not sure about learning games, but video games in general have definitely
improved my skills in life. Especially when it comes to problem solving and
persistence. I tend to work at difficult problems the same way I work on tough
levels in games.

I do think many games today don't teach this though. You need to be able to
lose. Old games made you lose constantly, you had to learn the patterns and
build up your reflexes and coordination. Much of life is actually like this.
It's a valuable skill to be able to keep going at something until you get it.
I've seen a lot of people just give up on things at the first hint of
difficulty, video games taught me not to do that and because of this, i'll
push and keep learning skills even when it gets frustrating and not so fun.
There's a lot of things I would've given up on if I hadn't learned that the
rewards for pushing through are usually worth it.

------
thesz
They have wrong control.

The control they should have is a group that lift weights [1], walks [3],
swims or runs [2] for two hours.

[1]
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3448565/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3448565/)
[2]
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14628975](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14628975)
[3]
[https://www.nemours.org/content/dam/nemours/www/filebox/serv...](https://www.nemours.org/content/dam/nemours/www/filebox/service/preventive/nhps/pep/exerciseactive.pdf)

Also, I think they did not test transience of effect observed - how long will
it last?

~~~
closed
Interestingly, people have run wm training studies with these control groups!

(Historical caveats about trusting the results of a single training study
apply)

[http://www.academia.edu/download/36902540/2015_ActaPsych_Mor...](http://www.academia.edu/download/36902540/2015_ActaPsych_Moreau.pdf)

------
dlkf
> “We found replicated evidence across multiple experiments that playing our
> games for two hours causes improvements in executive function skills as
> compared to a control group that plays an unrelated game,” said Mayer.

Christ what a low bar. That's like having your treatment group do jazzercise
while the control watches TV, and then concluding that jazzercise is the most
effective form of physical activity.

Your control group should be performing some sort of non-gaming intellectual
exercise: reading a passage and answering some questions, having a group
discussion on a serious topic, etc.

~~~
TallGuyShort
Low bars get you positive results. Positive results get you published.

~~~
CrazyStat
The joke when I was in academia was that there were two ways to get lots of
citations: publish a state-of-the-art model that gets cited because it's
state-of-the-art, or publish a bad model that gets cited a lot because
everyone wants to show how much they beat it by.

------
RcouF1uZ4gsC
> The first game, Gwakkamolé, was designed to train inhibitory control, a
> subskill of executive functions. Inhibitory control is the ability to
> control one’s attention, behavior, thoughts, and/or emotions.

A really simple way test/train your inhibitory control is play this "game"
with partner. Have them hold up either 1 or 2 fingers. When they hold up 1
finger, you have to say "2" and when they hold up 2 fingers, you have to say
"1". Try to do this as quickly and accurately as possible.

------
reportgunner
I guess this is as _research-backed_ as movies are _based on a true story_.

~~~
dspillett
Or the same way cosmetics are _science backed_.

Backed by a single simple study with too small a sample size and little or no
control group, paid for by the group currently making the claim (a group who
may have commissioned several other studies but didn't have them published
because the results were not as complimentary to their cause).

------
trimble_tromble
Their study of adolescents[1] did not use a control group. This is an issue,
as adolescent executive performance is likely naturally improving over time,
and said improvement may be non-linear.

[1][https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S036013151...](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131517302154)

------
geek-advised
This isn't new. Games are proven to help a lot of things in the brain. For
example reaction time: [https://www.futurity.org/video-games-speed-up-
reaction-time/](https://www.futurity.org/video-games-speed-up-reaction-time/)

Maybe it's just me, but this gives me an ad feeling.

------
SimpleMinds
The article sounds like an ad, and 2 out of 3 games listed doesn't sound like
anything new.

That being said, I think what is being said is that these 3 mechanics in the
games are particulary suited to improve your brain activities.

The 3rd game is reimplementation of one of the games that is proved to improve
your cognitive abilities - and I'm sorry, I cannot remember the name - which
was about forcing your brain to work on disonnanced tasks.

~~~
tgv
> I cannot remember the name

That's all the endorsement we need.

~~~
SimpleMinds
:) I would like to clarify that I didn't pursue using it for learning, so
that's why. I believe the app was probably worth time investment if that's
what you are looking for.

------
asdfman123
This is fascinating to me because I get the sense that this is the beginning
of a movement that will fully legitimize video games.

I've played lots of games that require quick decision making skills and
working memory, and perhaps it will become increasingly clear that when I
played them, I wasn't just wasting my time.

As younger generations gain power, traditional wisdom will change and maybe
people will start to see video games as productive. Really, the only downside
I see with them is that they can displace exercise and face-to-face
communication -- I know games can be social, but you really just need time
talking to other people with no distractions. But if you balance your life
appropriately, why not?

~~~
Enginerrrd
I am from a younger (ish) generation, and I think video games have been really
destructive in some ways. They offer an incredibly seductive and easily
accessible way to waste enormous amounts of time, and the worst aspect is that
some of the brightest minds I know are the most affected. They, unlike most
traditional hobbies, fill a human desire to exert control over their sphere of
influence in a totally artificial way. In that way, I definitely think they've
siphoned off some productive time from our most talented and otherwise
ambitious.

I quit playing videogames when I was about 16 or 17 and I still look back on
that as one of the best decisions I've ever made.

~~~
asdfman123
I'm a millennial, I've grown up with video games every bit as much as you
have.

------
sowbug
Android versions:

[https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.CREATELab....](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.CREATELab.Gwakkamole)

[https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.CREATELab....](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.CREATELab.CrushStation)

[https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.CREATELab....](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.CREATELab.AllYouCanET)

------
taneq
It sounds like they've literally just reimplemented Whack-a-mole, Simon Says
(or something similar), and... OK, the third one sounds newer, although it
reminds me of the pizza trolls in that Zoombinis game.

------
halfdan
I have a hard time believing an app is more beneficial to cognitive health or
motor skills, especially for kids, than actively exploring the world outside.

~~~
jchw
Where does it say these improve motor skills? I saw no such claim being made.

Also I don’t really get your point anyways. I’d think expanding one’s mind
would be accomplished by routines with good variety, and see no reason why
there needs to be a choice between play outside and play on a tablet.
Especially when a child is too young to really do much without supervision...

------
qwerty456127
Cool! I always wished somebody would create something like BrainWorkshop but
not boring. In fact I myself implemented the BrainWorkshop-like 2n-back game
(and it helped me a lot) immediately as the paper behind it got published,
when no publicly available implementations existed but I'm not good at
graphics and game design so a non-boring version was not something I could
make.

~~~
kranner
It is still controversial whether n-back games improve working memory outside
of the game context.

From
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-back](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-back):

> Two studies published in 2012 failed to reproduce the effect of dual n-back
> training on fluid intelligence. These studies found that the effects of
> training did not transfer to any other cognitive ability tests.[12][13] In
> 2014, a meta-analysis of twenty studies showed that n-back training has
> small but significant effect on Gf and improve it on average for an
> equivalent of 3-4 points of IQ.[14] In January 2015, this meta-analysis was
> the subject of a critical review due to small-study effects.[15] The
> question of whether n-back training produces real-world improvements to
> working memory remains controversial.

~~~
qwerty456127
That's curious to know, so I thank you for the reference, yet I don't care
much as it made and makes a huge difference for me personally. Perhaps that's
because it may be really effective for just a portion of people with specific
conditions in specific circumstances (e.g. I have ADHD and I also take
nootropics which are meant to increase neuroplasiticy, neurogenesis and
cerebral blood flow so the result is synergetic, nootropics alone don't give a
boost so profound) or maybe what gets improved is not the working memory but
something else playing important role in cognition. By the way it seemingly
has also improved my emotional intelligence, not just analytical one - I
didn't expect that.

~~~
kranner
Fair point, but may I ask if you feel there is an improvement intuitively, or
if you also measure it in some way (other than the game score itself).

~~~
qwerty456127
I don't really measure but I also wouldn't label it "an intuitive feeling" \-
it's an observation (not just a feeling like when you're stoned and feel
genius), although not scientifically credible. I have a well-developed self-
observation skill and can always tell when my cognition is less (for an
extreme example - avoid sleeping for some 36 hours, drink some booze and try
to be smart - you'll notice it's hard and you don't really do well, no need to
measure digitally) or more efficient. I believe I could measure if I knew a
good way [to measure fluid intelligence] and was interested enough but that's
not the case.

So, I recommend everybody to try n-back exercises for some time [and see if it
helps them] and I usually mention that's kind of proven to help scientifically
(at least in some papers) and empirically but avoid saying its efficiency is
anything close to an unquestionable fact. As a result people (including very
smart and educated already) immediately report feelings like stains have been
removed from their brains and their mental gears got greased.

~~~
kranner
> I usually mention that's kind of proven to help scientifically (at least in
> some papers) and empirically but avoid saying its efficiency is a strict
> fact.

All good but I must disagree with “kind of proven”. Things can be either
proven or not proven, and this is not proven.

~~~
gwd
> Things can be either proven or not proven, and this is not proven.

On the contrary, nothing in science is ever proven, only disproven. We can
have less or more confidence in a particular model; and whether you should use
a particular model depends on the cost/benefit analysis.

In this case, there is some evidence that it might be helpful, although
somewhat disputed; but playing the game certainly doesn't hurt, and doesn't
cost much, so it might make sense to give it a try.

~~~
kranner
> On the contrary, nothing in science is ever proven, only disproven.

Sure, but science is a specific case and I was talking about the all-or-
nothing nature of the meaning of 'proven' itself.

------
TulliusCicero
A number of studies have demonstrated cognitive improvement from playing video
games: [https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/freedom-
learn/201502...](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/freedom-
learn/201502/cognitive-benefits-playing-video-games)

> Improved visual contrast sensitivity. Successful treatment of amblyopia.
> Improved spatial attention. Improved ability to track moving objects in a
> field of distractors. Reduced impulsiveness. Overcoming dyslexia. Improved
> ability to engage in multiple tasks simultaneously. Increased mental
> flexibility. Reduction of mental decline that accompanies aging.

Mainstream culture doesn't really want to accept this, for...a variety of
reasons. And I still limit my son's screen time, even with games, because too
much turns him into a dickhead and other activities are also important. But I
don't doubt that for challenging games, there are cognitive benefits.

------
hmahncke
There doesn't appear to be a link to the "eight research articles reporting on
the effectiveness of these games" and google scholar doesn't show any relevant
publications by these authors - has anyone come the actual data?

------
aloisdg
Are those games FOSS?

------
sabujp
so play more memory games? gotcha

