Posit Science Program Effective in Study

Positive Science’s brain fitness software is the subject of a paper in a recent issue of the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. The paper presents results of the IMPACT study, a test of the effects of their software on elders’ cognitive functioning. The study is noteworthy for having been carried out at three sites by reputable scientists, and its design made it a genuine test of the effects of Posit’s program.

For those of you not familiar with Posit’s programs, they are based on key ideas developed by the company’s president Dr. Michael Merzenich. He has argued that it’s possible to change the functioning of the brain through targeted computer training, and the software focuses on key abilities such as the ability to detect rapidly-changing sounds and following lengthy sets of directions. Users of the software are encouraged to use it for about one hour a day, five days a week, for eight weeks.

One of the best things about this study is the control group used by the investigators. People in the control group (the one compared) were asked to do cognitive stimulation activities that are similar to those many people believe might be helpful — viewing an educational video and answering questions about it.

The IMPACT study showed that people who completed the computer-based training did better on outcome measures than the people in the control group. These outcome measures were neuropsychological measures in a battery given to participants both before and after they either used the program or were in the control group.

Statistical analyses showed that people who used the computer program scored better on these measures than the people in the control group. The authors conclude that the program may be helpful.

The differences between the groups were statistically significant, and that’s important for all of us to know. But it’s also important to look at how big the effect of using the program was. One measure, the Auditory Verbal Learning Test or AVLT, showed a significant difference. The AVLT asks someone to remember a list of 15 words. In this study, the people who used the computer program remembered, on average, about six tenths of a word more after using it.

This doesn’t mean the program isn’t useful. This amount of improvement is similar to that seen with some prescription medications used for Alzheimer’s disease, for example, and some people may have done much better than the average. It also doesn’t tell us how much change would occur for people who use the program over longer periods, too. But it seems to me that most people would want a clear idea of how well the program works before investing in it.