Still no evidence that exergames improve cognitive ability A commentary on Stanmore et al. (2017)
A recent meta-analysis (Stanmore et al. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 78:34–43, 2017) claimed that exergames exert medium-size positive effects on people's overall cognitive function. The present article critically tests this claim. We argue that the meta-analysis reported inflated effect sizes mainly for three reasons: (a) some effect sizes were miscalculated; (b) there was an excessive amount of true heterogeneity; and (c) no publication-bias-corrected estimates were provided. We have thus recalculated the effect sizes and reanalyzed the data using a more robust approach and more sophisticated techniques. Compared to Stanmore's et al., our models show that: (a) the overall effect sizes are substantially smaller; (b) the amount of true heterogeneity, when any, is much lower; and (c) the publication-bias analyses suggest that the actual effect of exergames on overall cognitive function is slim to null. Therefore, the cognitive benefits of exergames are far from being established.
| Item Type | Article |
|---|---|
| Departments | LSE > Research Centres > Centre for Philosophy of Natural and Social Sciences (CPNSS) |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.11.015 |
| Date Deposited | 20 Jan 2020 |
| Acceptance Date | 20 Nov 2019 |
| URI | https://researchonline.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/103135 |
Explore Further
- https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85076245955 (Scopus publication)