Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Dec;221(9):4369-4382.
doi: 10.1007/s00429-015-1168-7. Epub 2015 Dec 23.

Gray matter responsiveness to adaptive working memory training: a surface-based morphometry study

Francisco J Román  1 , Lindsay B Lewis  2 , Chi-Hua Chen  3 , Sherif Karama  2 , Miguel Burgaleta  4 , Kenia Martínez  1   5 , Claude Lepage  2 , Susanne M Jaeggi  6 , Alan C Evans  2 , William S Kremen  3 , Roberto Colom  7
Affiliations

Gray matter responsiveness to adaptive working memory training: a surface-based morphometry study

Francisco J Román et al. Brain Struct Funct. 2016 Dec.

Abstract

Here we analyze gray matter indices before and after completing a challenging adaptive cognitive training program based on the n-back task. The considered gray matter indices were cortical thickness (CT) and cortical surface area (CSA). Twenty-eight young women (age range 17-22 years) completed 24 training sessions over the course of 3 months (12 weeks, 24 sessions), showing expected performance improvements. CT and CSA values for the training group were compared with those of a matched control group. Statistical analyses were computed using a ROI framework defined by brain areas distinguished by their genetic underpinning. The interaction between group and time was analyzed. Middle temporal, ventral frontal, inferior parietal cortices, and pars opercularis were the regions where the training group showed conservation of gray matter with respect to the control group. These regions support working memory, resistance to interference, and inhibition. Furthermore, an interaction with baseline intelligence differences showed that the expected decreasing trend at the biological level for individuals showing relatively low intelligence levels at baseline was attenuated by the completed training.

Keywords: Brain plasticity; Cognitive training; Cortical surface area; Cortical thickness; Surface-based morphometry.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Genetic template for cortical thickness (top) and cortical surface area (bottom)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Standardized Change for the training and control groups (top panel) and ANCOVA results (bottom panel) for cortical thickness
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Standardized Change for the training and control group (top panel) and ANCOVA results (bottom panel) in cortical surface area
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
a Interaction analysis (Group × Intelligence × ROI): ROI 10–Cortical Thickness. Top panel shows the mean change in each group. Bottom panel shows the changes for each participant. Colors show different groups: dark blue (high intelligence-training group), light blue (low intelligence-training group), red (high intelligence-control group) and orange (low intelligence-control group). b Interaction analysis (Group × Intelligence × ROI): ROI 7–Cortical Thickness. Top panel shows the mean changes in each group. Bottom panel shows the changes for each participant. Colors show different groups: dark blue (high intelligence-training group), light blue (low intelligence-training group), red (high intelligence control group) and orange (low intelligence-control group). c Interaction analysis (Group × Intelligence × ROI): ROI 5–Cortical Surface Area. Top panel shows the mean changes in each group. Bottom panel shows the changes for each participant. Colors show different groups: dark blue (high intelligence training group), blue (low intelligence training group), red (high intelligence control group) and orange (low intelligence control group). d Interaction analysis (Group × Intelligence × ROI): ROI 7–Cortical Surface Area. Top panel shows the mean changes in each group. Bottom panel shows the changes for each participant. Colors show different groups: dark blue (high intelligence training group), blue (low intelligence training group), red (high intelligence control group) and orange (low intelligence control group)
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Summary of significant regions passing Bonferroni in the ANCOVA analyses
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Ad-Dab’bagh Y, Lyttelton O, Muehlboeck JS, Lepage C, Einarson D, Mok K, Ivanov O, Vincent RD, Lerch J, Fombonne E, Evans AC. In: Corbetta M, editor. The CIVET image processing environment: A fully automated comprehensive pipeline for anatomical neuroimaging research; Proceedings of the 12th Annual Meeting of the Organization for Human Brain Mapping NeuroImage; Florence, Italy. 2006.
    1. Aron AR, Robbins TW, Poldrack RA. Inhibition and the right inferior frontal cortex. Trends in cognitive sciences. 2004;8:170–177. - PubMed
    1. Au J, Sheehan E, Tsai N, Duncan GJ, Buschkuehl M, Jaeggi SM. Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis. Psychonomic bulletin and review. 2014:1–12. - PubMed
    1. Blanton RE, Levitt JG, Thompson PM, Narr KL, Capetillo-Cunliffe L, Nobel A, Toga AW. Mapping cortical asymmetry and complexity patterns in normal children. Psychiatry Res Neuroimag. 2001;107:29–43. - PubMed
    1. Bueti D, Lasaponara S, Cercignani M, Macaluso E. Learning about time: plastic changes and interindividual brain differences. Neuron. 2012;75:725–737. - PubMed

Publication types