The Default Mode Network and Brain Fitness

If brain fitness is more than just trying to avoid memory loss as you get older (and I think it is), then understanding how you think is (I think) critical. Sometimes called metacognition, this means not just thinking, but thinking about thinking.

Follow that? Metacognition is the idea that we can understand not only the content of our thinking, but the different processes that go into it. And understanding the ways that the default mode network and focused attention (both ways of thinking) interact are the subject of several interesting article.

The default mode network is a group of brain structures that become more active when someone’s attention is focused inward, thinking about what happened in the past or what might happen in the future. When a person’s attention is focused on the outer world, a different set of brain structures is activated.

A recent article in Neuroimage (click here for link) suggests that people who are less efficient in making the transition between the two sets of structures may be more creative. It’s as though the person’s internal world intrudes on reality. This finding has some appeal, because it helps us understand how creative persons can look at everyday life and see something radically different. It also helps us understand how someone’s unique individual vision can be so compellingly imposed on existing reality.

You don’t have to look very far to find examples. My personal favorites are Stanley Kubrick’s vision of the future in 2001, Fritz Lang’s in Metropolis, and the entire Dr. Who series from the BBC. Take an ordinary telephone call box, the vision of a sexy robot in the future, or a nghtmare of artificial intelligence, and extrapolate.

How do you apply this to your own brain fitness? Research shows that creativity, or at least its close relative, divergent thinking, can be taught, even to kindergarten-aged children. Jonah Lehrer wrote a recent article in the Wall Street Journal and a related blog post about the virtues of distractibility.

For optimal brain fitness, consider training yourself in divergent thinking.

Specific Cognitive Training for Brain Fitness

After more and more experience with cognitive training protocols, and looking at the developing research, I believe that we should begin to investigate more specific types of cognitive training rather than broad “batteries” of training. What I refer to by “battery” are the currently-popular software packages that include a diverse set of tasks that focus on everything from sustained attention through short-term memory to high-level reasoning.

Why focus on specific tasks? I think there are two reasons why our research and training should focus on more specific tasks. The first is that if we show the usefulness of a broad range of tasks, we don’t know which ones (or combinations of them) actually are related to any improvement we see on other tasks. The second is that if people spend, say, 10 minutes a day on 6 tasks, and improve on a measure of memory, we don’t know whether only one of those tasks caused the improvement. If only 10 minutes of training improves someone’s functioning, what might happen if a person did that training task 20 minutes a day?

Studies by Jaeggi and others have suggested that one specific type of training (one that focuses on working memory) may improve a person’s performance on a measure of fluid intelligence. The ACTIVE trial (sponsored by the National Institute on Aging) showed persisting benefits of specific kinds of training over years.

I think the next step is not to continue to try to show that training on a range of tasks can help people. More studies may show improved outcomes, but being able to remember one more word on a list learning task is of questionable importance to most people. What may actually help is the development of cognitive training regimens that target specific problem areas. Karlene Ball (who developed the Useful Field of View, now marketed in a package from Posit Science) helped to do this with a focus on driving. It may be possible to do this for common problems such as medication adherence.

That’s why I think we should be focusing on how specific kinds of training generalize to other abilities.

If you are already training, why not consider making yourself a research subject? Look at one specific cognitive task, and do it regularly for at least a month, better yet, two. Track your performance on what you hope to do better at. You could even rate yourself every week. Also take a look at your mood, and how good you feel about your cognitive abilities. Be systematic about what you’re doing, and you may find what works best for you.