Training the developing brain: a neurocognitive perspective - PubMed (original) (raw)

Training the developing brain: a neurocognitive perspective

Dietsje D Jolles et al. Front Hum Neurosci. 2012.

Abstract

DEVELOPMENTAL TRAINING STUDIES ARE IMPORTANT TO INCREASE OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE POTENTIAL OF THE DEVELOPING BRAIN BY PROVIDING ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS SUCH AS: "Which functions can and which functions cannot be improved as a result of practice?," "Is there a specific period during which training has more impact?," and "Is it always advantageous to train a particular function?"In addition, neuroimaging methods provide valuable information about the underlying mechanisms that drive cognitive plasticity. In this review, we describe how neuroscientific studies of training effects inform us about the possibilities of the developing brain, pointing out that childhood is a special period during which training may have different effects. We conclude that there is much complexity in interpreting training effects in children. Depending on the type of training and the level of maturation of the individual, training may influence developmental trajectories in different ways. We propose that the immature brain structure might set limits on how much can be achieved with training, but that the immaturity can also have advantages, in terms of flexibility for learning.

Keywords: brain maturation; cognitive control; development; executive functions; neuroimaging; plasticity; training.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1

Figure 1

This figure shows a simplified, metaphorical description of how training might influence developmental trajectories [based on Denney (1984); see also Hertzog et al. (2009)]. The blue curve shows the potential of cognitive functioning, which increases with age due to maturational changes and common environmental experience. In addition, optimal environmental input and training determine whether the “optimally exercised potential” (i.e., the upper limit of cognitive functioning at a certain age; Denney, 1984) can be reached. Arrow A shows how training may improve cognitive functioning by speeding-up development; arrow B shows how training might improve functioning in a way that deviates from the typical developmental trajectory.

References

    1. Albert N. B., Robertson E. M., Miall R. C. (2009). The resting human brain and motor learning. Curr. Biol. 19, 1023–1027 10.1016/j.cub.2009.04.028 -DOI -PMC -PubMed
    1. Aylward E. H., Richards T. L., Berninger V. W., Nagy W. E., Field K. M., Grimme A. C., Richards A. L., Thomson J. B., Cramer S. C. (2003). Instructional treatment associated with changes in brain activation in children with dyslexia. Neurology 61, 212–219 -PubMed
    1. Baltes P. B., Kliegl R. (1992). Further testing of limits of cognitive plasticity: negative age differences in a mnemonic skill are robust. Dev. Psychol. 28, 121–125
    1. Bangirana P., Giordani B., John C. C., Page C., Opoka R. O., Boivin M. J. (2009). Immediate neuropsychological and behavioral benefits of computerized cognitive rehabilitation in Ugandan pediatric cerebral malaria survivors. J. Dev. Behav. Pediatr. 30, 310–318 10.1097/DBP.0b013e3181b0f01b -DOI -PMC -PubMed
    1. Bavelier D., Green C. S., Dye M. W. (2010). Children, wired: for better and for worse. Neuron 67, 692–701 10.1016/j.neuron.2010.08.035 -DOI -PMC -PubMed

LinkOut - more resources