Comment · Wed, August 28, 2013 · Ceretropic
If Dual-N-Back training can truly improve working memory, why doesn't it appear to improve Gf?
Original post in this thread
[deleted] · 8 points
After perusing some of the relevant literature, it appears that the general consensus on DNB training is that it's able to increase WM (or at least some aspect of WM), but does not seem to increase fluid intelligence in young, healthy adults (although a lot more research in this area is clearly needed).
It's well established that WMC is highly correlated with Gf. I personally don't think that fluid intelligence and the capacity for learning is purely WMC, but WM certainly seems to be a large contributor to fluid intelligence. I would find it hard to believe that a significant increase in working memory, at its core, would not correspond to a significant increase in Gf.
So, why doesn't DNB appear to increase Gf, as measured by tests of "far transfer" like RAPM? Does this suggest that DNB training is only improving on a certain aspect of WM? Are DNB gains simply a product of learning/practice effects? Is WMC merely a correlate of Gf? etc.
Thoughts?
What they were answering
ThoughtfulJoker · 1 points
well given your grounds are your interpretation, would you mind striking up some reasoning as to why fluid intelligence and memory have a disjunction in the case of its most brilliant users, but a strong correlation everywhere else? e.g Argue away.
Is it poor term memory for everything you are suggesting? or just absent mindedness over keys which are somewhere in the house but don't_really_factor to a thinker engaged in highly complex tasks.
It seems to me that it is much more likely that their memory is being tasked elsewhere and thus drained. Otherwise we would also expect them to routinely forget their ideas and theories, which they don't do in my experience.
u/MisterYouAreSoDumb · Ceretropic
They can have a disjunction. I have an engineer friend that is a brilliant man. He is working for Freescale, and coming up with new ways to store plasma energy and increase the energy load that integrated circuits can handle. He has to write EVERYTHING down. He has hundreds of notebooks. If he doesn't write it down, he forgets it. That is the opposite of myself, who never writes anything down. My brain is capable of interpreting and storing that information without the need to document it.
By your argument, that would mean he is simply processing more information than me. However, that is definitely not the case. Just today I am writing an SAP certification exam and a steelmaking exam. I am also doing two phone system migrations, and troubleshooting a call center reporting issue. I am also working on the new nootropics business, designing labels, filing legal documents, answering customers. Then on top of that I am reading /r/Nootropics and researching other ideas. My brain is being pulled in a million different directions. However, my ability to store that information in both short and long term memory remains intact.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, I have a friend that remembers everyone's name, birthday, life events, etc. She is always up on what is going on in everyone's lives. However, she would not be considered super intelligent in the traditional sense. She cannot conceptualize difficult concepts, or understand complex mathematical/scientific theorems. She is not even interested in them. Yet she will remember that you told her your mother played the violin in high school, even though you mentioned it in passing years ago. Her memory is able to store that information, even though her fluid intelligence is not at the level of my engineer friend.
There is a disjunction between memory and fluid intelligence, for sure. I cannot point you to the mechanisms yet. However, the correlations you are mentioning go back to my analogy. How we measure certain aspects of cognition is dependent on the tools the person has. A person with better memory is going to perform better on the type of standardized assessments who's aim is to quantify their intelligence. Thus you get the correlations that you are referring to. To go back to my analogy: A mechanical engineer with better tools is going to be able to make a machine better than someone with higher skill, but lower quality tools. That does not mean he is a better engineer.