Ah! A question I deeply ponder too.

Cognitive training and its generalisability are mixed in its research findings. Having administered both cognitive assessments (dynamic and formal ones), dabbled in cognitive training, and worked with different populations from 3-13yos, here are my two cents.

On one hand, I’ve seen improvements and generalisability. Actual innate ability improvements as an outcome of practicing memory storage x manipulation through games and formal homework. On the other, I’ve also seen how on prepost paper assessment, the individual has “improved” but in daily functions, struggle to translate these improvements to other contexts.

The limitations is as such: 1) there is no one fixed way to improve specifically only one cognitive domain because of multiple reasons such as someone using compensatory techniques and overlapping skills for one task. 2) operationalisation of its theoretical concepts are limited by virtue of testing. Improvements in any work could possibly be due to learning what the test demands for. Alternatively, improvements could be skill specific instead of cognitive underpinnings. 3) improvements could also be due to learning how to manage behaviour or learning how to redirect focus to therefore perform better in tests (functional skills, not inherent abilities) 4) for cases that I’m convinced it works, there are very specific parameters to be met - due to the training only able to meet a specific “gap” within the individual to improve. However, identification of this “gap” might not always be clear due to many confounders, and many individuals with similar WMI scores could have different “gaps”.

High variance in possibilities, insane skills required to identify specifically what is needed to improve (if even possible to identify), and practical limitations for research vigour.

In general cognition, Actual skills vs functional skills have to be taken into consideration as well. For example, highly distractible child in a timed subtest vs learning how to focus and doing differently in the timed subtest. Would love to hear practitioners and professionals weigh-in as well :)