Grounded in Experience

The Simply Smarter Project is an initiative of the NACD Foundation, a not-for-profit daughter organization of the National Association for Child Development (NACD). The Simply Smarter Project directly benefits from the deeply rooted clinical experience of NACD.

NACD’s Experience

Under the direction of founder Robert J. Doman, Jr., NACD has created a neurodevelomental approach to the remediation of developmental, educational, and neurological problems based upon the gestalt of the individual. NACD’s neurodevelopmental approach utilizes neurologically-based, targeted, and eclectic treatment methodologies that have been verified with over 30,000 clients, from infant to geriatric, whose function has ranged from comatose to gifted.

For the last four decades, NACD has been working internationally to enhance the cognitive and global function of people of all ages—from babies to seniors. Software to improve auditory and visual processing was actually first produced by NACD in 1982 utilizing Commodore Pet Computers. NACD has experienced, through the application of targeted cognitive training activities, that many people of all ages were able to improve aspects of their cognition. Due to 30+ million hours of intervention, NACD has gained tremendous insight and learned some valuable lessons that have significance for individuals and the world. From our extensive clinical experience it appears that:

  • How we function reflects neither our individual potential, nor that of our species. We all possess an innate potential that far surpasses virtually everyone’s expectations.
  • Our ability to think, learn, understand, and communicate—our cognitive function– is largely a reflection of the stimulation and opportunities we have received throughout our lifetime.
  • The foundational component of cognitive function is the ability to sequentially process information for subsequent mental manipulation and utilization.
  • The now universally accepted understanding of the neuroplasticity of the human brain is such that we can stimulate the brain by supplying it with targeted input of sufficient frequency, intensity, and duration and physically transform its structure and function.
  • Thus, targeted intervention can transform the brain to achieve improved cognitive processes.
  • As sequential processing improves overall cognitive function is enhanced.

Understanding Learning

We primarily learn through what we see and what we hear. Our brains take in new pieces of visual and auditory information in a piece-by-piece sequential process to a certain level of retention. This level of sequential processing is referred to as short-term memory. The short-term memory provides the capacity for holding together the pieces of information to be manipulated with our executive function, including our working memory. We manipulate information in our working memory two ways: through thinking in pictures, called visualization, and thinking in words, called conceptualization. Executive function is the term used for the manipulation of information in working memory via visualization or conceptualization. Executive function utilizes the manipulated information by drawing upon information you have previously learned. Utilization refers to making sense of the information made relative by referencing what we already know and have stored in long-term memory. Executive function is also used to describe the higher-level cognitive functions that control problem solving, impulse control, organization, time management, etc., all components that contribute to improved global function.

Current State of Academic Research

While NACD has been helping individuals make gains in sequential processing and working memory for more than 30 years, the academic community has just begun to acknowledge that working memory can be developed and improved [1-6]. That is, the neuroplasticity of the brain allows it to be physically transformed to create a greater working memory [7-9]. Furthermore, improved working memory has the potential to transfer to higher-order mental abilities such as fluid intelligence [10-12], reading comprehension [13-14], math competence [15], and the self-remediation of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms [16-18], to name just a few.

The effects of cognitive training transferring to other mental abilities outside the specific cognitive processes necessary to perform the training activity are called “far-transfer effects.” Therefore, enhanced fluid intelligence, reading comprehension, math competence, and other higher-order mental abilities are potential far-transfer effects of improved working memory. However, the exact far-transfer effects of any given specific cognitive process are poorly understood; or, in this case, the far-transfer effects of the specific components of working memory are poorly understood [19]. This is likely because there are a number of working memory models within the academic community that fail to agree on everything from what components constitute working memory to the actual definition of what those components are [20]. Gibson et al. (2013) also notes these far-transfer effects are poorly understood in part because the specific cognitive processes that are actually being trained by existing training programs are not really understood.

Current State of Cognitive Training

The academic research highlights the three major problems with current cognitive training programs on the market. First of all, training programs other than NACD’s, which target the foundation of cognition, mainly train cognitive processes that are subsidiary to the core components of all cognitive function, and therefore, these training programs have limited far-transfer effects. Secondly, training programs do not understand the underlying cognitive processes necessary to perform their training activities, and therefore, the training activities rarely target the cognitive processes involved and improvement often plateaus. Finally, if the cognitive processes are not targeted, then the training activities also cannot be optimized to produce the most improvement in the least amount of time.

The NACD Advantage

Perhaps NACD’s approach most significant advantage is that it works with not aspects of the individual, but with the whole individual. It has, since its inception, understood and utilized neuroplasticity, and has correlated everything from aspects of cognition, motor function, hearing, vision, speech, academics, behavior, and health and diet, etc. NACD’s work with individuals has as its foundation a great awareness of the far-transfer effects of all aspects of individual development and function, from their nutrition and sleep to effects of exercise, the positive or negative aspects of their environment, to global effects of improved hand function, changes in self worth, to cognitive enhancement. It is the very nature of how NACD works and interacts with individuals and their families.*

NACD has already answered the questions the academic community is just beginning to ask, has put the knowledge into practice, and has refined, through the firsthand experience of working intimately with over 30,000 clients over four decades. NACD has an understanding of the core components of cognitive function and how these cognitive processes relate to overall function. As a result, NACD has been able to develop the targeted, optimized cognitive training activities that have reaped benefits with the tens of thousands of individuals with whom they have worked, including the areas of:

  • Academics (students with strong processing abilities demonstrate high academic skills)
  • Reading comprehension
  • Learning across subject matter
  • Communication and language expression
  • Problem solving
  • Reasoning
  • Concentration
  • Attention span
  • Conceptual thought
  • Visualization
  • Mathematics
  • Global maturation

We invite academic and neuroscience researchers to test the effect of the far-transfer effects of NACD’s cognitive training programs following our best practices versus any other training program on the market. Meanwhile, the Simply Smarter Project will continue to investigate the effects of far-transfer effects, as well as other aspects.

*The neuropsychological world is at best focused on pieces of individual function and often just pieces of their neurological function and as such tend not to see the big picture, which if you will helps explain why it took them so long to recognize that working memory could be changed. If they took their eyes off of trying to understand the pieces of Executive function long enough they would have realized that working memory normally develops through childhood and into our young adult lives and if it develops, it changes and because of neuroplasticity what changes can be changed.

Click here to read the research behind the Project

 

References & Resources

  • Alloway, T. (2005) Working memory in children with reading disabilities. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 
  • Alloway,T.P.,Gathercole, S.E., & Pickering, S.J. (2006) Verbal and visuo-Spatial short-term and working memory in children. Are they separable? Child Development, 77, 1698-1716. 
  • Alloway, T. Gathercole, S. E. (2008). Evaluating the validity of the Automated Working Memory Assessment. Educational Psychology. 28(7), 725-734. 
  • Alloway, T.,Gathercole, S.E. (2009), The cognitive and behavioral characteristics of children with low working memory. Child Development, 80(2), 606-621. 
  • Akbarifeizabadi,F., Nouri, R. K., & Mosmer, R. Get cognitively fatigued and be more confident. The effect of working memory capacity and cognitive load on meta-reasoning. International Journal of Health Sciences, 48189-48209.  
  • Aries,R.J.,Maassen van den Brink, H., & Groot,W. (2015). Is working memory training effective in enhancing school-based reasoning achievement? A systematic review. Working paper No. 15-02. Retrieved from TIER website. 
  • Aries, R.J., Groot,W. & Maassen van den Brink, H. (2015) Improving reasoning skills in secondary history education by working memory training. British Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 210-228. 
  • Aries, R.J. et al. Thinking skills and creativity 22 (2016) 233-246. 
  • Au, J.,Sheehan, E., Duncan, G.J., Buschkuehl, M. & Jaeggi, S.M.(2014). Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. 
  • Baddeley, A. D., &Hitch, G. (1974). Working Memory. In G.A. Bower(ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol.8 pp.47-89). New York: Academic Press. 
  • Baddeley, A.,Papagno, C., Vallar, G.(1988) When long-term learning depends on short-term shortage, Journal of Memory and Language, V 27-5, 586-595. 
  • Baddeley, A. D. (1996) Exploring the central executive. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A, 5-28. 
  • Baildon, M.C., & Sim, J.B.Y.(2009). Notions of criticality.”Singaporean teachers’ perspectives of critical thinking in social studies. Cambridge Journal of Education, 39(4), 407-422. 
  • Beck, S.J., Hanson,C.A., Puffenberger, S. S., Benninger, L.I., &Benninger, W. B. (2010) A controlled trial of working memory training for children and adolescents with ADHD. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 39, 825-836. 
  • Buschkuehl, M., & Jaeggi, S. M.(2010). Improving Intelligence. A literature review. Swiss Medical Weekly, 140, 266-272. 
  • Cherqaoui,L.,El Haddadi,A. (2024). The Impact of Working Memory on Reading Performance and Neurological impairments in individuals with Dyslexia. Science Step Journal II (6), 28-39. 
  • Cheshire, A.,Ball, L.J., & Lewis,C.(2005). Self-explanation, feedback and the development of analogical reasoning skills. Microgenetic evidence of metacognitive processing account. Alpha. Sheridan Publishing. 
  • Chein, J.M., & Morrison, A.B. (2010). Exapnding the mind’s workspace. Training and transfer effects with a complex working memory span task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 193-199. 
  • Colom, R., Flores-Mendoza, C., & Rebollo, I. (2003). Working memory and intelligence. Personality and Individual differences, 34(1), 33-39. 
  • Cornoldi, Cesare, and Mammarella, Irene.(2013) The structure of Working memory and how it relates to intelligence in children. Intelligence. 
  • Cowan, N. (1998) Visual and auditory working memory capacity. Trends in cognitive sciences.2.3:77. 
  • Cowan, N.(1998) Attention and memory, An integrated framework. Oxford University Press. 
  • Cowan, N. (2008) What are the differences between long-term, short-term, and working meory: Progfress in Brain Research. 169, 323-338. 
  • Dahlin,K.(2010). Effects of working memory training on reading in children with special needs. Reading and Writing. 24. 
  • Dalton, P. ,Santangelo, V., &Spence,C. (2009). The role of working memory in auditory selective attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 62(11), 2126-2132. 
  • Dang,Cai-Ping, et al. (2002)“Why is working memory related to intelligence? Different contributions of storage and processing.”Memory 22.4 
  • Davidson, M.C., Amso, D., Anderson, L.C., & Diamond,A.(2006). Development of cognitive control and executive functions from 4 to 13 years: Evidence 
  • Diamond, A.,& Lee, K.(2011). Interventions shown to aid executive function development in children 4 to12 years old. Science, 333, 959-964. 
  • Doman, R.J., Haslam,W. B.,(2012)Comparison study measuring working memory as measured by reverse auditory digit spans and classic mode of Simply Smarter Memory app.The NACD Foundation. Vol.25. N8. 
  • Doman,R.J.,(2015)Short term memory, working memory, long-term memory and Norfolk pines. The NACD Foundation. Vol.28,N1. 
  • Doman, R.J., Haslam,W.B.,(2012)The effect of Simply Smarter on short-term, working and long-term memory. Vol25,N7. 
  • Doman, R.J, (2008)Short term and working memory: clinical insights.2nd Annual Congress of Developmental Psychology.University of Aquascalientes,Aguascalientes, Mexico.The NACD Foundation, Vol. 21, N17. 
  • Doman,R.J.(2024) Education and neuroplasticity. The NACD Foundation. Vol 37,N1. 
  • Engle, R.W. (2002) Working memory capacity as executive attention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11. 
  • Fangmeier, T., Knauff, M., Ruff, C.C.,& Sloutsky,V.(2006) fMRI evidence for a three-stage model of deductive reasoning. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18(3). 
  • Fung,D.,& Howe,C.(2012). Liberal studies in Hong Kong: A new perspective on critical thinking through group work. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 7(2) 101-111. 
  • Fung, D. C., & Howe, C.J. (2014). Group work and the learning of critical thinking in the Hong Kong secondary liberal studies curriculum. Cambridge Journal of Education. 44(2) 245-270. 
  • Fuster, J.M.(2003). Cortex and mind: Unifying cognition. Oxford: University Press. 
  • Gathercole, S.E., Pickering,S.J., Ambridge, B.& Wearing, H.(2004). ). The structure of working memory from 4 to 15 years of age. Developmental Psychology, 40, 177–190.  
  • Gathercole, S.E., & Alloway, T.P.(2004). Working memory and classroom learning. Dyslexia Review,15.4-9. 
  • Gazzaniga, M. S., Ivry, R. B., Mangun, G. R., & Steven, M. S. (2009). Cognitive neuroscience: The biology of the mind (3rd ed.). New York: W.W Norton & Company.  
  • Gibson, B.S., Gondoli, D. M., Johnson, A. C., Steeger, C. M., Dobrzenski, B.A.& Morriessey, R.A. (2011). Component analysis of verbal versus spatial working memory training in adolescents with ADHD: A randomized controlled trial. Child Neuropsychology. 17, 546-563. 
  • Gibson, B.S., et. Al. (2013). Exploration of an adaptive training regimen that can target the secondary memory component of working memory capacity. Memory Cognition. DOI 10.3758/s13421-013-0295-8. 
  • Goel, V. (2007). Anatomy of deductive reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(10), 435–441.  
  • Gold, J. M., Berman, K. F., Randolph, C., Goldberg, T. E., & Weinberger, D. R. (1996). PET validation of a novel prefrontal task: Delayed response alteration. Neuropsychology, 10, 3–10.  
  • Goldberg, E. (2010). Het sturende brein: Onze hersenen in een complexe wereld. Amsterdam, Wereldbibliotheek: M. Stoltenkamp, Trans. 
  • Gropper, R. (2013). Working Memory Training in College Students With Attention Deficit. Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, 129. 
  • Hale, Sandra. “Relationships among Processing Speed, Working Memory, and Fluid Intelligence in Children.” Biological Psychology (2000) 
  • Holmes, J., Gathercole, S. E., & Dunning, D. L. (2009). Adaptive training leads to sustained enhancement of poor working memory in children. Developmental Science.  
  • Holmes, J., & Gathercole, S. E. (2014). Taking working memory training from the laboratory into schools. Educational Psychology, 34(4), 440–450.  
  • Jaeggi, S. M., Buschkuehl, M., Jonides, J., & Perrig, W. J. (2008). Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(19), 6829–6833. 
  • Jausovec, N., & Jausovec, K. (2012). Working memory training: Improving intelligence-changing brain activity. Brain and Cognition, 79, 96-106. 
  • Jolles, J., De Groot, R., Van Benthem, J., Dekkers, H., De Glopper, C., Uijlings, H., et al. (2006). Brain lessons: A contribution to the international debate on brain, learning & education, based on the results of an invitational conference organized by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO). Maastricht: Neuropsych Publishers.  
  • Kane, T., Rockoff, J., & Staiger, D. (2008). What does certification tell us about teacher effectiveness? Evidence from New York City. Economics of Education Review, 27, 615–631.  
  • Karbach, J., Strobach, T., & Schubert, T. (2014). Adaptive working-memory training benefits reading, but not mathematics in middle childhood. Child Neuropsychology, 
  • Kimura, D. (1996). Sex, sexual orientation and sex hormones influence human cognitive function. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 6(2), 259–263.  
  • Kramarski, B., & Mevarech, Z. R. (2003). Enhancing mathematical reasoning in the classroom: The effects of cooperative learning and metacognitive training. American Educational Research Journal, 40(1), 281–310.  
  • Kramarski, B., & Mevarech, Z. R. (2003). Enhancing mathematical reasoning in the classroom: The effects of cooperative learning and metacognitive training. American Educational Research Journal, 40(1), 281–310.  
  • Kumar, S., Joseph, S., Gander, P. E., Barascud, N., Halpern, A. R., & Griffiths, T. D. (2016). A brain system for auditory working memory. Journal of Neuroscience, 36(16), 4492-4505. 
  • Lee, K., Ng, E., & Ng, S. (2009). The contributions of working memory and executive functioning to problem representation and solution generation in algebraic word problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(2), 373–387.  
  • Leinhardt, G., Stainton, C., Virji, S. M., & Odoroff, E. (1994). Learning to reason in history: Mindlessness to mindfulness. In G. Leinhardt, C. Stainton, S. Virji, & E. Odoroff (Eds.), Cognitive and instructional processes in history and the social sciences. New York, NY: Routledge.  
  • Lustig, C., Hasher, L., & Tonev, S. T. (2001). Inhibitory control over the present and the past. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 13(1-2), 107–122. 
  • Magimairaj, B. M., & Nagaraj, N. K. (2018). Working memory and auditory processing in school-age children. Language, speech, and hearing services in schools, 49(3), 409-423. 
  • Martinkauppi, S., Rämä, P., Aronen, H. J., Korvenoja, A., & Carlson, S. (2000). Working memory of auditory localization. Cerebral cortex, 10(9), 889-898. 
  • Melby-Lervag, M.,& Hulme, C.(2012). Is working memory training effective: A meta-analytic review. Developmental Psychology.doi:1027/a00028228. 
  • Mevarech, Z. R., & Kramarski, B. (2003). The effects of metacognitive training versus worked-out examples on students’ mathematical reasoning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 449–471.  
  • Miyake, A., Friedman, N.P., Emerson, , M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex ‘‘frontal lobe’’ tasks: a latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology , 41, 49–100 
  • Morrison, A.B., &Chein, J.M.(2011). Does working memory training work? The promise and challenges of enhancing cognition training working memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,18, 46-40. 
  • Nagy Jacklin, C., & Martin, L. J. (1999). Effects of gender on behavior and development. In M. D. Levine, W. B. Carey, & A. C. Crocker (Eds.), Developmental-behavioral pediatrics (3rd ed., pp. 100–106). Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders.  
  • Nevo, E., & Breznitz, Z. (2014). Effects of working memory and reading acceleration training on improving working memory abilities and reading skills among third graders. Child Neuropsychology, 20(6), 752–765. 
  • Olesen, P., Westerberg, H., & Klingberg, T. (2004). Increased prefrontal and parietal activity after training of working memory. Nature Neuroscience, 7(1),  
  • Paus, T. (2005). Mapping brain maturation and cognitive development during adolescence. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 9(2), 60–68.  
  • Plessis, S. D., & Maree, D. (2019).Auditory short-term memory, visual-sequential memory and inductive reasoning matter for academic achievement. Edulearn 19 Proceedings. 
  • Presti, Gianluca Lo.(2014) “The Crucial Role of Working Memory in Intellectual Functioning.” European Psychologist. 
  • Rydzewska, Klara.(2016). “Three Functional Aspects of Working Memory as Strong Predictors of Early School Achievements: The Review and Illustrative Evidence.” Polish Psychological Bulletin. 
  • Salminen, T., Mártensson, J., Schubert, T., & Kühn, S. (2016). Increased integrity of white matter pathways after dual n-back training. Neuroimage, 133, 244–250.  
  • Sander, M. C., Lindenberger, U., & Werkle-Bergner, M. (2012). Lifespan age differences in working memory: A two-component framework. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 36, 2007–2033.  
  • Schneiders, J.A.,et al.(2012) The impact of auditory working memory training on the fronto-parietal working memory network. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6. 
  • Shipstead, Z.,Redick,T.S., & Engle, F. W. (2012) Is working memory training effective? Psychological Bulletin, 138, 628-654. 
  • Spanoudis, George. (2016 “Cognitive Correlates of Developing Intelligence: The Contribution of Working Memory, Processing Speed and Attention.” Intelligence. 
  • Suja Kunnath. (2016). Auditory Short Term Memory and Academic Achievement in Normal School Going Children. International Journal of Health Sciences and Research. 
  • Süss, H.-M., Oberauer, K., Wittmann, W. W., Wilhelm, O., & Schulze, R. (2002). Working-memory capacity explains reasoning ability—And a little bit more. Intelligence, 30, 261–288.  
  • Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257–285.  
  • Unsworth, N.,& Spillers, G. J. (2010). Working memory capacity. Attention control, secondary memory, or both? A direct test of the dual component model. Journal of Memory and Language, 62, 392-406. 
  • Van der Sluis, S., De Jong, P. F., & Van der Leij, A. (2007). Executive functioning in children, and its relations with reasoning, reading and arithmetic. Intelligence, 35, 427–449.  
  • Van Drie, J., & Van Boxtel, C. (2008). Historical reasoning: Towards a framework for analyzing students’ reasoning about the past. Educational Psychology Review, 20(2), 87–110.  
  • Von Bastian, C. C., & Oberauer, K. (2013). Effects and mechanisms of working memory training: A review. Psychological Research, 78, 8 
  • von Bastian, C. C., & Oberauer, K. (2013). Distinct transfer effects of training different facets of working memory capacity. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(1), 36–58. 
  • Westerberg, H., Hirvikoski, T., Forssberg, H., Klingberg, T.(2004) Visuo-spatial working memory: a sensitive measurement of cognitive deficits in ADHD. Child Neuropsychology, 10, 155-161. 
  • Willis. S.L., Tennstedt, S. L., Marsiske, M., Ball, K., Elias, J., Koepke, K.M., Morris, J.N., Rebok, G.W., Wright, E. (2006). Long-term effects of cognitive training on everyday functional outcomes in older adults. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 296(23), 2805-2814.