My IQ increased 20 points.

[Pontus Granström]

I can do better. But gwern etc. this is the final nail in the coffin. DNB WORKS!!!

[ФІ-14 Богдан Мишинкин]

Congratulations 👏🎉👍!

Le ven. 9 sept. 2022 à 17:34, Pontus Granström <lepo...@gmail.com> a écrit :

I can do better. But gwern etc. this is the final nail in the coffin. DNB WORKS!!!

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dual N-Back, Brain Training & Intelligence" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to brain-trainin...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/CAGUFBG%2BBbWJH5peRFuX683tBy4X%3D114esdjHfSNmOva3JRbE2Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bo T]

Congrats for the high score! Would you mind elaborating further? (i.e Since when have you been training? When did you take the first IQ test and was it the same type? Have you trained in taking IQ tests? What version of dual n back do you train with? etc...) 

[Samuel Kusa]

Bro good and congrats on it Questions:

(1) do you use Image streaming or believe in it increasing Iq

(2) How many months or years did you do Nback

[Pontus Granström]

I took RAPM at age 20 scored 108, now after 13 years of running and dualnback I knew that my IQ had increased I wasnt thinking about taking test, but when I saw that they tested just around the corner I paid and went there. 

This is mensa administered tests so it is legit results. It is a 1.5sd difference, pretty sure that if I trained more I would do even better. Especially for single visual nback as mensa uses visual stimuli. Figure reasoning is just visual vm nothing more than that.

 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dual N-Back, Brain Training & Intelligence" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to brain-trainin...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/67b4bcce-7b6a-49b7-b290-ce7db93797den%40googlegroups.com.

[Bo T]

Let's substract around 7 points from the 20 point gain to control for a margin of error ( other variables that might have affected your previous score such as sleep and exercise), because 13 years is a very long time and who knows what could have changed during such a period, so we are effectively talking about 1 IQ point per year of persistent training. 

Conclusion: DNB might be effective but very inefficient at raising IQ. 

[fruitsnackattack]

A solid 10 points is efficient no matter how long it takes considering how most people spend their entire lives in the same within the same range.  

[fruitsnackattack]

Have you noticed an increased abiltiies to solve real life problems in general over the course of this?

[Pontus Granström]

Yes of course especially math and my master thesis.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dual N-Back, Brain Training & Intelligence" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to brain-trainin...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/c76f1418-66df-4cec-b148-9e9bcc75872en%40googlegroups.com.

[Bo T]

No it is absolutely inefficient if you have to invest a whole year of training for 1 IQ point, you could train to play a musical instrument or learn a new language during a year and end up with more gains and useful skills on top of that. 

[Pontus Granström]

I guess my IQ increased after 3 months but they gains remained for 13 years. I still do nback.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/2bf2c158-3b49-43d5-b9fd-31a11e6baf86n%40googlegroups.com.

[Engin Dinçer]

Have you observed any life changes? I wonder what habits 20 points would change in a person's life. Are you more into books?

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/CAGUFBGJxc%3DpfV84H7n0sK-NFO1jT%2B8w%3DJVeqwxi1QyngX1bh9g%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Engin Dincer

[Pontus Granström]

I think that I get less anxiety when doing nback and it certainly helps with blocking out noise when thinking. That your IQ increases is not so surprising. Its when you refocus from feeling overwhelmed and overcome overload your IQ increases. It feels good that after 15 years that I can finally say I was right all along....

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/CAG0o83cyX96X1tdK-T4fzM-5GaNKJii7enSJWDpf%3DNBHti0RYg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Bo T]

Would you kindly go to the website brainlabs.me, perform the 4 memory tests, and report your scores here? The whole process would take about 5-10 minutes of your time, if you score in the 90th percentile or more on each of those tests then that would dispel doubts about the efficacy of dnb, at least in its ability to increase working memory. 

[Bo T]

And on top of that, Brainlabs tests are high quality cognitive tests so the results are reliable. This is your shot at proving Gwern wrong once and for all. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/CAGUFBGJZBSMCJhpMN4VDf1tyDo-k2%3Dv9iWZ90m3p_bL_-ASFmA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Pete Levy [PL]]

It does not make sense.

That's because you have no idea what point he started from. You are trying to evaluate the starting point without knowing the input. The tests are performed before and after the training process. Possibly in the process. And then you can compare this stuff.

Meanwhile, we can take his word for it or not, as we have no evidence of a lower IQ in the past.

It is a pity that he took the test so late, because we do not know in what time he achieved the result. Did he need a few / a dozen years or maybe the IQ increased much faster?

[Bo T]

That is true but we can assume that his working memory ability was somewhere close to 108 (his fluid intelligence/Gf) because WM and Gf are generally correlated (barring any learning disabilities like adhd). So if the training truly resulted in a 1.5 SD gain in Gf, then we should expect  1.5 SD gain in terms of WM and probably even more than that because the degree of near transfer is always higher than far transfer.

[Pontus Granström]

I took a mensa test at age 20 scored 108, took a mensa test at age 42 scored 128. Thats documented now. So the idea of a "fixed" IQ is pretty much nonsense. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/0b9f12f2-5fef-4e01-a209-ec76631f5e7an%40googlegroups.com.

[Bo T]

https://wais-iv-digit-span-00667a.netlify.app/

If you don't mind, take this short test and post a screenshot of the scores here. I'm very interested in seeing how veteran  Nbackers (such as yourself)  perform on WM tests. 

[nema...@gmail.com]

It has perfectly clear from all his posts that Gwern does not want people to train and increase their mental capabilities.

[Pontus Granström]

Hi,

I couldn't agree more, this is very important to him for some reason.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/3d449a8f-47e8-4c37-8724-3d0b4d5954d3n%40googlegroups.com.

[Bo T]

That is a dishonest characterization of Gwern's position. Even Richard Haier ( leading researcher in the field of intelligence) will tell you that brain training doesn't increase the g-factor based on all the studies to date.  All i'm saying is if you measure your WM using other tests ( digit span, brainlabs, etc...) and score high on them, this group would have some defense (albeit anecdotal) against Gwern. 

[nema...@gmail.com]

Gwern does not ever put studies which support brain training (and many of them exist), he just appears and puts those studies who do not prove the benefits! It is a fact, which can be checked in this google group. What are his reasons and motivation I do not know. My hypothesis is that is an act of pure evident malicious intention that other people demotivate themselves and do not develop their own mental capabilities.

The truth about the brain training topic is that science is still far from reaching strong consensus in sense what kind of brain training helps brain development, and what kind of brain training does not do anything. There is so much variability in brain trainings, and the studies take years to be published, so we will need to wait for one or two decades until conclusions converge.

What we know for sure is that there there are many individuals in brain training groups, including myself, who can confirm you the benefits of brain training, after performing long-term, regular and intensive exercises, periods and sessions.

[Bo T]

To be fair, the most comprehensive meta analysis on dual n back has shown a 0.24 effect size on generalized Working memory and fluid intelligence, which is a very small effect size. This isn't to say that there cannot be a training program which would be effective, there simply just isn't enough evidence to make the claim that WM training is very effective. However, when "king of stars" constantly rails against Gwern, then makes sensational and unverifiable claims about a 20 IQ gain, then boasts about being right and all the research being wrong  when he refuses to provide proof of even near transfer, Someone should call it out. He has been evading providing his working memory scores for a while now. 

[nema...@gmail.com]

To be fair and clear: the science still did not converge yet about the efficiency of brain training since there are not enough long-term studies with lots of participants and there is a great variability in types of exercises, whereas on the other side Gwern did converge and thinks it is surely not efficient, while carefully selecting and forwarding only the papers which cannot confirm how it works and how much does it work.

To be fair and clear again: There are many papers which show positive correlations between brain training and improved mental capacity as well as far-transfer effects.

So my message to all people outside: be positive, train hard, be patient, and you will have great results in your cognition. The science will prove that I am correct someday.

[Bo T]

Please show the studies that back up your claims. 

and to Robert : 0.24 is about 5 IQ points, but that's extrapolated from many studies. Some individual studies have found zero effect on fluid intelligence.

[nema...@gmail.com]

"The WM training group showed increased WM and math performance compared to the control group. Also, there was a trend toward some improvements in vocabulary after WM training, and overall improvements after both trainings were observed in fluid intelligence and reading. Analyses of individual differences in the WM training group indicated increased training performance in relation to emotional stability, conscientiousness, power of endurance, as well as teacher-reported joy of learning and social integration of participants. Thus, the results indicate the potential of WM training to improve WM capacity and mathematical skills and reveal the impact of regulative, motivational, and social factors on cognitive training performance."  (URL)

=============================

However, finer grained analyses reveal a more complex relationship between brain training and cognitive performance. Specifically, individuals who have just begun to brain train start from a low cognitive baseline compared to individuals who have never engaged in brain training, whereas those who have trained for a year or more have higher working-memory and verbal scores compared to those who have just started, thus suggesting an efficacy for brain training over an extended period of time. The advantages in global function, working memory, and verbal memory after several months of training are plausible and of clinically relevant scale. However, this relationship is not evident for reasoning performance or self-report measures of everyday function (e.g., employment status and problems with attention). These results accord with the view that although brain training programs can produce benefits, these might extend to tasks that are operationally similar to the training regime. Furthermore, the duration of training regime required for effective enhancement of cognitive performance is longer than that applied in most previous studies. (URL)

==============================

Cognitive training aims to produce a durable transfer to untrained abilities (i.e., far transfer). However, designing effective programs is difficult, because far transfer mechanisms are not well understood. Greenwood and Parasuraman (Neuropsychol 30(6):742–755. https://doi.org/10.1037/neu0000235, 2016) proposed that the ability to ignore distractions is key in promoting far transfer. While the authors identified working-memory training based on the N-back task as an effective way to train distraction suppression, a recent meta-analysis concluded that this form of training rarely produces far transfer. Such inconsistency casts doubt onto the importance of distraction suppression in far transfer and calls for further examination of the role of this ability in cognitive training effectiveness. We propose here to conceptualize distraction suppression in the light of the load theory of attention, which distinguishes two mechanisms of distractor rejection depending on the level and type of information load involved: perceptual selection and cognitive control. From that standpoint, N-back training engages a single suppression mechanism, namely cognitive control, because it mainly involves low perceptual load. In the present study, we compared the efficacy of N-back training in producing far transfer to that of a new response-competition training paradigm that solicits both distraction suppression mechanisms. Response-competition training was the only one to produce far transfer effects relative to an active control training. These findings provided further support to Greenwood and Parasuraman’s hypothesis and suggest that both selection perception and cognitive control need to be engaged during training to increase the ability to suppress distraction, hence to promote far transfer.(URL)

==============================

Conclusion Improved sustained attention following WM training indicates the far transfer of the training effect to the sustained attention, and confirms the involvement of sustained attention in the central executive part of WM. On the other hand, no change in short-term verbal memory after training indicates that the mechanism of WM training effect is through strengthening the central executive, not through improving the phonological loop of WM. (URL)

==============================

The application of a WM training is a promising tool for both healthy adults, and in particular for older subjects, as it showed physiological and behavioral differences in cognitive plasticity across life span and evidence of benefits in the trained task and near-/far-transfer effects to other cognitive functions.(URL)

==============================

The large number of behavioral studies testing whether working memory training improves performance on an untrained task have yielded inconclusive results. Moreover, some studies have investigated the possible neural changes during the performance of untrained tasks after training. Here, we studied the transfer from n-back training to the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT), two different tasks that use the central executive system to maintain verbal stimuli. Participants completed fMRI sessions at baseline, immediately after one week of training, and at the five-week follow-up. Although behavioral transfer effects were not obtained, training was associated with decreased activation in the anterior dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC; BA 9/46) while performing the PASAT that remained stable five weeks later. Consistent with our hypothesis, the changes in the anterior DLFPC largely overlapped with the n-back task fMRI activations. In conclusion, working memory training improves efficiency in brain areas involved in the trained task that may affect untrained tasks, specifically in brain areas responsible for the same cognitive processes.(URL)

==============================

Google scholar searches:

• n-back, transfer effect
  
• meditation, transfer effect
• n-back, working memory
  

[Bo T]

Have you actually read anything of what you linked? None of these studies show any far transfer whatsoever. 

" Our results showed that training was effective in improving performance on the trained task, but not on the transfer task."  Nback training doesn't even transfer to the PASAT task. 

[nema...@gmail.com]

Can you clarify the question please?

If you ask me whether I read full studies, of course: not.

I read abstracts/conclusions of the authors, which clearly support my two statements: (1) the science still did not converge in many questions about brain training, (2) there are many papers which prove positive correlation between brain training and improving different cognitive functions, including far-transfer effects. Still many studies are needed.

Should I spent few months and analyse entire studies so that I can come to the same conclusions as scientists specialised in the field did, or only reading/posting abstracts/conclusions are acceptable to you?

[nema...@gmail.com]

• What is actually your suggestion? Waiting 20 or 30  years for the science to come up with strong consensus, so that people after that start training? The thing is that it is so hard to prove far transfer effects, since there are such small samples of people, people doing only doing short-term training, etc.
• I am not claiming that any brain training works, but specific brain training exercises (n-back) showed benefits in some studies. This is undisputable. Of course it is not to be expected that someone will train for 2 months and increase IQ for 10 or 20 points until the rest of his life. The brain is a muscle, which needs to be regularly trained to be able to lift harder and more mental tasks. Which exercises should be done- we still are not sure.
• There are many people here witnessing it worked for them, why should we think they lie? There are many people here witnessing it worked for them (including me), why should we think they all lie?

My strong message is that people should give it a tray, train persistently hard, trying many different mental exercises, being patient, and the results will surely come. If the results do not come, asking other for their suggestions and trying harder. If results still do not come, quit and try again later if you wish.

[SameThing]

what mode do you use? dual n-back? combination n-back?

what is your level?

суббота, 10 сентября 2022 г. в 19:44:19 UTC+5, King Of The Stars:

[ghost]

how often do you train & for how long? only dual or even triple & quad? what is your average N?

[SebZ]

Congratulations!

While the score increase is very impressive it seems like a great effort when one reads 13 years of practice, however it's still worth. 

Regarding the nbacking and visual stimuli having trained for two months just nback I observer that solving RAPM type puzzles became easier - I simply could keep in my memory more pieces which helps with establishing a pattern e.g. keeping in mind first, second, third, fourth as opposed to comparing just first with second, then second with third. 

Having said that I noticed improvement, I understand your thinking would have improved many years ago already and 13 years practice is more to keep these gains? Similarly with muscles, one gets the greatest gains in the beginning, first few months to a year or two, then plateaus. Nevertheless these gains will be very noticeable. Would you say it's the same with your dnb?

Also, what's your routine if you don't mind? And what keeps you going? I literally fall asleep sometimes when nbacking. 

On Saturday, 10 September 2022 at 06:53:27 UTC+1 King Of The Stars wrote:

I took RAPM at age 20 scored 108, now after 13 years of running and dualnback I knew that my IQ had increased I wasnt thinking about taking test, but when I saw that they tested just around the corner I paid and went there. 

This is mensa administered tests so it is legit results. It is a 1.5sd difference, pretty sure that if I trained more I would do even better. Especially for single visual nback as mensa uses visual stimuli. Figure reasoning is just visual vm nothing more than that.

 

Den fre 9 sep. 2022 22:39Samuel Kusa <kusas...@gmail.com> skrev:

Bro good and congrats on it Questions:

(1) do you use Image streaming or believe in it increasing Iq

(2) How many months or years did you do Nback

On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 4:34:18 PM UTC+1 King Of The Stars wrote:

I can do better. But gwern etc. this is the final nail in the coffin. DNB WORKS!!!

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dual N-Back, Brain Training & Intelligence" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to brain-trainin...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/67b4bcce-7b6a-49b7-b290-ce7db93797den%40googlegroups.com.

[Michael Dawn]

Sup,

Have you tried other VM exercises?

For example when I was a kid I used to add and multiply numbers when I was a kid.

A year ago I got 135+ on Mensa that I think is inflated cause of that.

Also I heard from the bioneer guy on youtube (the buff one) that rummikub is better for VM than Dual N-Back (rigorous exercise that people actually want to do for a long time).

Just my 2 cents.

On Fri, Sep 9, 2022, 17:34 Pontus Granström <lepo...@gmail.com> wrote:

I can do better. But gwern etc. this is the final nail in the coffin. DNB WORKS!!!

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dual N-Back, Brain Training & Intelligence" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to brain-trainin...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/CAGUFBG%2BBbWJH5peRFuX683tBy4X%3D114esdjHfSNmOva3JRbE2Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[Pontus Granström]

I have done almost all exercises but would say that single nback is the best. 

Like I said your IQ increases the most the first few weeks when you recalibrate but its worth to do nback before any deamanding task. You have to experiment with what suits your mind. 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/CAEuPS5hdjyU6nLqp1grMx%2BNvSOvr7xDLvBB%2B8dvJ%2B3MBn4ZgGg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Sebastian Zukowski]

I noticed the same. I recently started doing nback and dnb before work or some demanding task and thinking is easier. 

I suppose it has also "meditative" effect where you focus on one task and it clears your mind

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/CAGUFBGKF8tx5iM31uTN%3D%3D313Br9GDryRegV4hUiZyGnhT%3DL5Kg%40mail.gmail.com.

[itrn...@gmail.com]

Purely theoretical but this is how I contextualize N back training. If we compare brain training to weightlifting: it takes around 3-5 years to reach about 85-90% of your genetic potential to build muscle, on average working out 1-2 hours 4-5 times a week, with a healthy diet of a bit of caloric surplus. That is a lot of time and dedication. Even if by comparison, it takes less training hours to do roughly the same with something like N back(ex: 100% genetic potential is around dual 13 back), I would say it takes at least a hundred hours or so or pure training time, more like 200. But I think that is only because the N back is just a single cognitive training task. Consider the analogy: strength for a compound lift at the gym is best improved just doing that lift. Lets assume squat strength as WM capacity, quad extension strength could be N back performance. I'm sure those who gym will know, but your strength on the quad extensions don't exactly transfer extremely well to your squat strength. The squat is more comprehensive, requires coordination multiple muscles, balance, etc. Also different ranges of motions, different tension throughout the range of motion, etc. As for fluid intelligence, that could be a composite valuation of overall strength of your entire body in this analogy using compound lifts. But of course, our methods of evaluating fluid intelligence are much less concrete/accurate/simple than evaluating strength of compounds lifts, so this could result in some statistical error/confusion. Based on this analogy and what I've noticed about the testimonials here and elsewhere, I think 100-200 hours of each brain training task, perhaps 3-5(perhaps a lot more, who knows) which target different aspects cognition including WM, combined with a healthy lifestyle and diet geared towards improving brain function, would most definitely enhance fluid intelligence beyond what would be achieved through improving health alone. I also think training volume(total session duration) and intensity(inverse of rest between sets/time between trials), not just weight(N-back level) should be increased with further progress in order to avoid plateauing, and a healthy bit of variation and overloading is optimal as well. But again, purely theoretical, this is just how I approach and see N back training.

[itrn...@gmail.com]

I'm sure you'd understand to some degree if you read The Structure of Scientific Revolutions by Thomas S. Kuhn, but Rick Sanchez once said "sometimes science is more art than science Morty". Lol

[Chris Bitos]

Hello everyone! I am watching this group for some time and I am interested in your experiences regarding nback and dual nback. At what level of single n back ( I suppose it's visual) do you think you derive the most benefits from? Single 5 back ? Single 6 ? Do you believe that the benefits you observe plateau at some level or start to rapidly diminish after you reach a certain level? What about the experiences you had with dual n back levels? Is it better than single or single is enough to improve working memory? My limited experience shows, I think, better improvement in wm after single n back and perhaps better reaction time and increased focused attention in some matters after dual nback, though the results could be attributed to single. I do not know! I have reached dual 10 back (visual and color stimuli), with very inconsistent plays regarding level, meaning I could reach for example dual 9 back at 75% and fail next moment at dual 6 back at 45%. Somehow though regarding dual nback real life effects (I mean noticeable by me, perhaps there are no effects and they are attributable to other mental exercises) I feel the best results so far (value for money level so to say) is dual 4 back or 5 back. I am interested in hearing your experiences and thoughts regarding single and dual nback levels and perceivable benefits if at all.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/8b18d806-a999-4e91-8a58-80bd63828114n%40googlegroups.com.

[Veronika Yakovenko]

Hi! In short, you receive the most benefit while actually feeling 'pain' during exercising. As long as it remains challenging - there are cognitive benefits.

In my experience, with visual and auditory stimuli (I've been using the N-Back Challenge app for a few days), there's always a plateau when I reach a new level. It takes a couple of days (sometimes weeks😅) to get comfortable with it, but then the brain adapts and it gets easier. 

Here is a really nice article about this with some links to the studies. Please let me know what you think, looking forward to hearing more about your experience!

[Pontus Granström]

As for this cambridge stuff, when it first came out, 4 out 10 top scorers (leaderboard TOP 10) was a member of this group (dual-n-back) including myself.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/43a8c72f-4fb2-4038-8dbf-cc8409610651n%40googlegroups.com.

[Bo T]

I've been using Cambridge brain sciences (Brainlabs.me)  lately, here are my working memory scores:

Paired associates : 5 

token search : 13

spatial span : 8

monkey ladder:  8

How well do you score on these tests? 

[blade killer]

The brain is not muscle, stop spreading that lie.

[Leonardo]

I was also in the Top 10 at some point. 

[Arturo Lorenzo]

Firstly, congrats on the result! I think >1SD, however long, it's MASSIVE gains.

Just wondering, you said you trained for 13 years, but how often? Was it a daily consistent training? Do you have a total number of hours in mind? 

I'm currently invested in a very consistent regime of at least 30' daily. 

[Pontus Granström]

I did the regular 20min dnb in the beginning but now I only do a few mins a day. However before mensa I did a full course of i9 mindware.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dual N-Back, Brain Training & Intelligence" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to brain-trainin...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/6d7c1d22-cec0-4b09-a756-037038710aedn%40googlegroups.com.

[Arturo Lorenzo]

Great. Do you remember how many months / years for each? You mention 20 mins in the beginning and only few mins a day so I wonder how many years you spent training 20 mins daily. Thanks!

[Pontus Granström]

Maybe one year then the months before mensa. But I cant remember how much in between that.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/90dbb1f5-09f6-4c4c-8f22-e7306de50decn%40googlegroups.com.

[Arturo Lorenzo]

Thanks!

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/brain-training/CAGUFBGKeTitfo%3DMms8fw%3DRntnZHn4SMMsdhrzZ4OG00F2tgXAg%40mail.gmail.com.

[King David]

This is all very interesting.  I think what would be the gold standard for IQ increase, is if there was a way to consistently train 1 hour per day, 5 days per week and your IQ would increase 1 point per month.  If we could figure that out, or science could, that would be useful and worth the effort.  I think we are a bit of a ways off from figuring out how to do that.  A lot of this stuff produces gains though, but they might be more minor and take a very long time.

[Corrado Soprano]

Are the MENSA tests just matrices? How would n-back increase matrix performance?