Cognitive Development 49 (2019) 43–50

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Cognitive Development
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cogdev

Young adults learning executive function skills by playing focused

T
video games
⁎
Richard E. Mayer , Jocelyn Parong, Kaitlin Bainbridge
University of California, Santa Barbara, United States

A R T IC LE I N F O ABS TRA CT

Keywords: The goal of this focused review is to examine the potential of using computer games as vehicles
Games for learning for improving cognitive skills in young adults, particularly the cognitive development of ex-
Cognitive skill training ecutive function skills, such as being able to shift attention efficiently from one task to another
Executive function (i.e., shifting). On the disappointing side, this review finds a lack of convincing evidence that off-
Brain training
the-shelf games (often designed for entertainment) promote executive function skills. In addition,
Cognitive consequences
there is a lack of consistent evidence that long-term exposure to brain training games, such as
offered in Lumosity, improves performance on non-game measures of executive function such as
shifting (Bainbridge & Mayer, 2018). However, on the encouraging side, this review finds pro-
mising evidence for the benefits of playing a focused computer game that is designed to provide
repeated practice on a targeted executive function skill (e.g., shifting) in a variety of contexts, at
progressively increasing levels of challenge, and with clear feedback (Parong et al., 2017). The
most promising direction for games aimed at fostering the cognitive development of executive
function skills is to create mini-games that target a specific skill and are grounded in cognitive
theories of skill learning.

1. Introduction

1.1. Objective and rationale

Every day, around the world, parents are telling their children they can play video games after they finish their homework, but
suppose we could change the world so that playing video games is the homework. The goal of this focused review is to examine
research evidence concerning whether computer games can serve as vehicles for promoting the development of cognitive skills.
Specifically, the goal is to review our research on how to design computer-based games to help students develop specifically targeted
executive function skills. Rather than providing a comprehensive review or meta-analysis, our goal is to systematize the research on
game-based learning of executive function skills in young adults, including highlighting examples from our research program.
Although research on games for teaching cognitive skills is just beginning, we identify three phases: (1) round 1 examines whether
playing commercially available games can improve players’ cognitive skills, (2) round 2 investigates whether playing brain training
games can improve players’ cognitive skills, and (3) round 3 examines the effectiveness of playing games that are specifically
designed to teach a targeted skill based on cognitive theories of skill learning.
The research methodology best suited to address questions about the instructional effectiveness of computer games for learning is
cognitive consequences research (Mayer, 2014; Mayer, in press). Cognitive consequences research addresses the impacts of playing

⁎
Corresponding author at: Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, United States.
E-mail address: mayer@psych.ucsb.edu (R.E. Mayer).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2018.11.002
Received 10 July 2018; Received in revised form 2 October 2018; Accepted 18 November 2018
0885-2014/ © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
R.E. Mayer et al. Cognitive Development 49 (2019) 43–50

video games by comparing the pretest-to-posttest gains in a particular cognitive skill of a group that plays a game for an extended
period of time (game group) to the pretest-to-posttest gains of a group that plays a control game unrelated to the target skill for the
same amount of time (active control group) or no game at all (inactive control group). Effect size based on Cohen’s d provides a
common metric for determining the number of standard deviations better the game group performed on the cognitive skill than the
control group. An important consideration is the genre of video game such as action video games (in which players shoot at rapidly
changing targets), spatial puzzle games (such as the classic game, Tetris, in which players rotate falling shapes), and brain training
games (which are gamified versions of basic cognitive tests).
Research on training of executive function through computer games fits within the broader context of developmental research on
cognitive interventions designed to promote executive function skills (Diamond & Lee, 2011; Zelazo, 2015). This includes attention
control training in infants (Ballieux, Wass, Tomalski, Kushnerenko, & Karmiloff-Smith, 2016; Haiko et al., 2016), inhibition and
working memory training in preschoolers (Thorell, Lindqvist, Bergman Nutley, Bohlin, & Klingberg, 2009), and cognitive control
training in elementary school children and adults (Karbach & Kray, 2009; Kray & Ferdinand, 2013).
Developmental research suggests that executive function develops from age 7 onward over the teenage years and is related to
academic success (Best, Miller, & Naglieri, 2011). Promising research on training executive functions with computer games has
focused on teenagers ranging from 14 to 18 years old (Best, 2014; Homer, Ober, & Flynn, 2018; Homer, Plass, Raffaele, Ober, & Ali,
2017). In this paper we seek to expand the age-span beyond middle childhood and adolescence to examine young adults mainly in the
age range of 18–20 years old, and in some cases the early 20s, in order to better investigate the trajectory of development.

1.2. What is the role of executive function skills in academic success?

We focus on how to train cognitive skills that may be most useful in academic settings, and our particular focus is on a specific
subset of cognitive skills called executive function skills. Executive function skills are a set of cognitive processes used for effortful,
goal-directed thinking and behavior (Banich, 2009; Best, 2012; Miyake, Friedman, Emerson, Witzki, & Howerter, 2000). Miyake et al.
(2000) have identified three major components of executive function: shifting (i.e., efficiently moving from one task to another),
inhibition (i.e., suppressing a commonly used response when it is not appropriate), and updating (i.e., keeping track of a series of
sequentially presented items).
Executive function skills have been shown to be involved in academic learning and performance (Best, 2014; St. Clair-Thompson
& Gathercole, 2006). For example, Pellicano et al. (2017) reported that preschoolers’ scores on measures of executive function
predicted their school readiness (such as receptive understanding of colors, letters, numbers, sizes, comparisons, and shapes). Si-
milarly, Shaul and Schwartz (2014) reported that scores on measures of executive function were strong predictors of emergent
literacy and mathematical knowledge in preschool children. Cameron et al. (2012) found that scores on measures of executive
function predicted scores on assessments of academic achievement among elementary school children. Similarly, low performance on
tests of executive function were associated with learning problems in students in middle school and high school (Chiang & Gau,
2014). Overall, these studies exemplify the growing support for the positive role of executive function skills in students’ academic
success.

1.3. What are computer games for learning?

Computer games1 for learning are games that are intended to promote academic learning, including content knowledge in
academic subject areas and cognitive skills that support academic learning (Mayer, 2014, in press). The idea that playing computer
games can foster the development of cognitive skills was expressed more than 30 years ago in Loftus and Loftus (1983, p. 121) classic
book, Mind at Play: "It would be comforting to know that the seemingly endless hours young people spend playing Defender and Pac-
Man were really teaching them something useful." However, at that time there was not a sufficient research base to answer this
question. Computer games have long been recognized as cultural artifacts (Greenfield, 1996), but scientifically sound research on the
effectiveness of computer games as educational tools is in its early stages (Mayer, 2014, in press).

2. Round 1: can off-the-shelf games improve executive function skills in students?

The first round of research on the instructional effectiveness of computer games focused on off-the-shelf games. Since the early
conjectures on the educational potential of computer games for learning, computer games have grown in sophistication and variety,
and become more widespread (Blumberg, 2014; Mayer, 2014; Wouters & van Oostendorp, 2017). Along the way, game proponents
have offered many strong claims for the power of digital games to revolutionize education (Gee, 2003; McGonical, 2011; Prensky,
2006; Schafer, 2006; Squire, 2011). For example, Prensky (2006, p. 4) asserts: "Kids learn more positive, useful things for their future
from their video games than they learn in school."
In contrast, members of the scientific research community have cautioned that there is a need to test these claims against rigorous
scientific evidence (Honey & Hilton, 2011; Mayer, 2014, 2016; O’Neil & Perez, 2008; Tobias, Fletcher, Dai, & Wind, 2011). For

1
We use the terms computer game and video game interchangeably to refer to games that are delivered via digital media, including on desktop
computers, laptop computers, game consoles, tablets, cell phones, and immersive virtual reality (Mayer, 2014, in press). However, we also note that
features afforded by different game-based media could have effects on learning.

44
R.E. Mayer et al. Cognitive Development 49 (2019) 43–50

Table 1
Cognitive Consequences of Playing Tetris.
Source Cognitive skill Effect size

Sims and Mayer (2002) Mental rotation: Card rotation test −0.15
Mental rotation of non-Tetris letters 0.23
Mental rotation of non-Tetris shapes 0.23
Pilegard and Mayer (in press) Mental rotation: Card rotation test −0.03
Visualization: Form board test 0.01
Perceptual attention: Useful field of view 0.26
Perceptual speed −0.65
Adams et al. (2016, Expt. 1) Mental rotation of non-Tetris shapes 0.30
Perspective taking −0.48
Adams et al. (2016, Expt. 2) Perspective taking 0.01

example, in a report from the National Research Council, Honey and Hilton (2011, p. 21) concluded: "There is relatively little
research evidence on the effectiveness of simulations and games for learning."
As an example, consider the spatial puzzle game, Tetris, which is considered "the greatest computer game of all time" (McGonical,
2011, p. 23). In Tetris, a player must rotate falling shapes to fit together into spaces at the bottom–a task that appears to require basic
cognitive skills such as mental rotation. In a recent review, Mayer (2014) found evidence that playing Tetris had a positive effect on
mental rotation of Tetris shapes in 6 of 6 studies, with a median effect size of 0.82, but this benefit generally did not transfer to other
spatial skills, including mental rotation of other kinds of shapes not seen the game. For example, as shown in Table 1, playing Tetris
for 10 h (as compared to playing a different game or no game at all) did not have a large, consistent effect on mental rotation of
shapes not found in Tetris (Sims & Mayer, 2002), playing Tetris for 4 h did not have a strong, consistent effect on mental rotation skill
or related spatial cognition skills (Pilegard & Mayer, in press), nor did playing Tetris for 1 h (Adams, Pilegard, & Mayer, 2016).
Although some research has found substantial positive effects of game playing on spatial cognition tasks with children
(Subrahmanyam & Greenfield, 1994), a meta-analysis showed that research with college students did not produce encouraging
evidence for the benefits of playing Tetris (Mayer, 2014). Overall, it appears that one of the greatest and most studied video games is
not a particularly effective venue for helping players develop their cognitive skills.
Taking a broader look, in a recent review of 152 comparisons in cognitive consequences experiments on video gaming, Mayer
(2014) was able to identify only one strong case in which playing an off-the-shelf game resulted in improvements in cognitive skill
beyond the game. In 17 of 18 comparisons, students who were assigned to play action video games such as Medal of Honor or Unreal
Tournament showed greater gains in perceptual attention skills than those who were assigned to play other kinds of games or no
games, yielding a median effect size of d = 1.18, which is a large effect. However, there was not strong support for the effectiveness of
other kinds of games on other kinds of cognitive skills, including lack of support for an effect of game playing on improvements in
executive function skills.
Further evidence for the benefits of playing action video games comes from a recent meta-analysis by Bediou et al. (2018) in
which students who were assigned to play off-the-shelf action video games for at least 8 h showed gains on cognitive skill measures
such as perceptual attention and spatial cognition that were an average of 0.34 standard deviations greater than for students who
were assigned to play non-action video games. In contrast, however, a meta-analysis reported by Sala, Tatlidil, and Gobet (2018)
found negligible effect sizes (i.e., below d = 0.20) of playing action video games on perceptual attention skills, and consistent with
previous work also found negligible or negative effect sizes of playing action video games on other cognitive skills such as executive
function, memory, and reasoning skills.
Overall, there may be promising evidence that off-the-shelf games in the action video game genre can serve to help students
develop perceptual attention skills under ideal conditions of long-term exposure, but there is not convincing evidence that off-the-
shelf games help students develop other cognitive skills needed for academic success, including executive function skills. Although
some studies have yielded substantial positive effects of game playing on executive function skills (Green, Sugarman, Medford,
Klobusicky, & Bavelier, 2012; Nouchi et al., 2012; Whitlock, McLaughlin, & Allaire, 2012), the majority have not (Basak, Boot, Voss,
& Kramer, 2008; Boot, Kramer, Simons, Fabian, & Gratton, 2008; Glass, Maddox, & Love, 2013; Goldstein et al., 1997).
We conclude that there is not convincing evidence for the effectiveness of off-the-shelf computer games in improving cognitive
skills, except for the possible benefits of playing action video games on perceptual attention skills. Although, we might like to hope
that gamers are learning something useful from all their hours of game playing, today's research base does not give much reason for
that hope. Given that most off-the-shelf computer games were designed for entertainment rather than cognitive skill development,
one might wonder why anyone would expect them to foster the development of useful cognitive skills. Having lost round 1 in our
search for effective computer games for learning, this leads us to round 2 in which we examine off-the-shelf games that fit in the genre
of brain training games–that is off-the-shelf games that are purported to improve cognitive skills.

3. Round 2: can brain training games improve executive function skills in students?

In order to provide a fair test of the potential of game playing on cognitive skills including executive function, we moved from
examining the cognitive consequences of playing popular off-the-shelf games (such as Tetris for spatial skills and action video games

45
R.E. Mayer et al. Cognitive Development 49 (2019) 43–50

for perceptual attention) to examining brain training games. Brain training games are a small but important genre of off-the-shelf
games that are claimed to improve the cognitive functioning of players. For example, Lumosity is a popular suite of brain training
games that can be played on a subscription basis. In particular, Bainbridge and Mayer (2018) examined the effects of playing Lumosity
brain training games that focused on flexibility (an aspect of executive function involving rule shifting and inhibition) or perceptual
attention (involving rapid visual identification and processing). In a preliminary experiment, young adults were assigned to spend 3 h
across 4 sessions playing five flexibility games offered in the Lumosity suite of brain training games (i.e., Ebb & Flow, Disillusion,
Color Match, Brain Shift, and Brain Shift Overdrive) or five perceptual attention games (i.e., Eagle Eye, Birdwatching, Observation
Tower, Top Chimp, and Space Junk), or played no game at all.
The games in the Lumosity suite are mainly gamified versions (Kapp, 2012) of basic cognitive tasks such as a gamified version of a
card sorting task (Zelazo, 2006) to measure shifting skill (i.e., Color Match) or a gamified version of a Stroop task (Stroop, 1935) to
measure inhibition skill (i.e., Brain Shift). Gamification involves presenting basic cognitive skill tests in the context of an appealing
game-like environment that includes visually interesting displays, colorful onscreen elements, and score keeping. All participants
were given pretests and posttests on cognitive tasks intended to measure flexibility (i.e., card sort task and Stroop task) and per-
ceptual attention (i.e., useful field of view and change detection). In the card sort task, the participant is shown an object and asked to
sort it based on a rule that changes from trial to trial. In the Stroop task, participants are given a printed color name in a colored ink
(such as RED printed in green ink) and asked to indicate the color of the ink. In the useful field of view task, participants are asked to
look at the center of the screen as there is a brief flash somewhere on the screen, and then indicate the direction of the flash. In the
change detection task, the participant views a screen showing many colored shapes before and after an event, and then to indicates to
which shapes changed in size or color. Overall, the game groups did not show greater pretest-to-posttest gains than the control group
on any of the cognitive skill tests.
This study can be criticized on the grounds that cognitive skill development may take more than 3 h, so we conducted a second
experiment in which young adults spent up to 80 15-min sessions playing 5 flexibility games or 5 perceptual attention games offered
by Lumosity or no game at all. Games were played at home and tracked by the game’s software. Similar to Experiment 1, the attention
group did not show significantly greater pretest-to-posttest gains than the control group or the flexibility group on any of the tests–
including both measures of accuracy and response time. The flexibility group showed significantly greater gains than the control
group and the attention group on one of four measures of flexibility (Stroop response time), which is very similar to one of the
Lumosity games, and one of the four measures of attention (useful field of view response time). Overall, the results show that playing
up to 80 sessions of Lumosity brain training games serves to improve performance on the games themselves, but does not widely
transfer to cognitive skills required on tasks outside the game context. In short, there was not strong evidence that extensive practice
with an off-the-shelf set of brain training games can substantially improve executive function skills.
Similarly, reviews of the effectiveness of other brain training platforms do not offer consistently strong evidence. For example, in a
meta-analysis, Hulme and Melby-Lervag (2012) found no evidence that students benefitted from working memory training for at least
two weeks with CogMed–a popular brain training program–nor from other randomized controlled trials involving other working
memory training platforms. Hulme and Melby-Lervag (2012, p. 281) were forced to conclude: "in the best designed studies…even the
immediate effects of training were essentially zero."
In contrast, promising results in training working memory have been reported in preschoolers (Thorell et al., 2009), children with
ADHD (Dovis, Van der Oord, Wiers, & Prins, 2015; Klingberg et al., 2005), and typically developing children (Loosli, Buschkuehl,
Perrig, & Jaeggi, 2012). In a meta-analytic review of cognitive interventions for children with neurodevelopmental disorders,
Robinson, Kaizar, Catroppa, Godfrey, and Yeates (2014, p. 846) found positive evidence for working memory training programs but
lamented "the overall very low quality of the evidence." Overall, some research on working memory training in non-game contexts
suggests an important shift towards focusing on a single executive function skill, which is the approach taken in the next section.
Overall, round 1 and round 2 allow us to conclude that there is not strong and consistent evidence that off-the-shelf games, even
brain training games, can serve as effective vehicles for promoting the development of executive function skills. Thus, the initial
phases of research on the cognitive consequences of playing computer games have been somewhat disappointing with respect to our
quest to help students develop executive function skills.

4. Round 3: can cognitively-designed games improve targeted executive function skills in students?

Given the difficulties in finding off-the-shelf games that have a strong impact on helping students develop executive function skills
(such as shifting, inhibiting, and updating), the next step is to determine whether we can construct focused computer games that are
based on cognitive principles of skill learning and are focused on specific executive function skills. The main change in round 3 is to
move from brain training games, which consist of a suite of multiple discrete game-like exercises each involving drill on a gamified
(Kapp, 2012) version of a classic cognitive task, to cognitive-designed games that target a single cognitive skill and are designed
based on evidence-based principles of skill learning. In short, the main difference is that round 3 focuses on games that are speci-
fically designed to improve a single, target skill (such as shifting), whereas in round 2 the games involve a collection of cognitive
skills aimed at improving the mind in general.
In particular, we began by targeting the executive function skill of shifting, and applying the following cognitive design principles:
providing repeated practice on the target skill, in a variety of contexts, at increasing levels of challenge to maintain high challenge
throughout, with embedded feedback, and without excessive perceptually distracting onscreen activity. These evidence-based
standards for game design are based on cognitive theories of skill learning (Anderson & Bavelier, 2011; Bediou et al., 2018; Mayer,
2014). For example, Anderson and Bavelier (2011) and Bediou et al. (2018) have pointed to cognitive research on the role of repeated

46
R.E. Mayer et al. Cognitive Development 49 (2019) 43–50

practice on the target skill within a variety of settings and shown how it is consistent with the effectiveness of first-person shooter
games in training perceptual attention skills. Ericsson (2006) has summarized research showing the benefits of practice with em-
bedded feedback at increasing levels of challenge, which he calls deliberate practice. Mayer (2009) has summarized research on the
effectiveness of excluding extraneous material from the screen in multimedia instruction. As we could not find a commercial game to
meet these standards, we constructed our own game, and play tested it with children at various age levels through multiple rounds of
development (Parong et al., 2017).
The result of this game development process is now called, All You Can ET, in which aliens come down from the top of the screen
and the player's job is to shoot up various kinds of nourishment from a dispenser at the bottom of the screen based on ever-changing
rules, such as, "red aliens are thirsty and blue aliens are hungry". When the alien receives the right kind of nourishment it shows
excitement and floats upward whereas when the alien receives the wrong kind of nourishment it gets upset and falls downward. The
aliens often change their mind (e.g., now "read aliens are hungry and blue aliens are thirsty"). At higher levels of the game, the rule
change involves the number of eyes (e.g., "one-eyed aliens are hungry and two-eyed aliens are thirsty"), and at even higher levels the
rules get more complex and require faster responses. Players earn points for successful deliveries and lose points for unsuccessful
ones.
In a set of four experiments, Parong et al. (2017) asked college students (averaging 18 years old) to play the All You Can ET game
or play a control game, and take cognitive tests intended to measure switching skill before and after the game (i.e., Dimensional
Change Card Sort test and Letter-Number task). In the Dimensional Change Card Sort test (Zelazo, 2006) students must classify
objects on the screen on the basis of a rule (e.g., color or shape) which can change from trial to trial. In the Letter Number task
(Miyake et al., 2000), students must classify a letter-number pair on the basis of a rule (e.g., vowel vs. consonant for the letter or odd
vs. even for the number) and the focus (i.e., letter or number) changes based on the locations of the letter-number pair on the screen.
Task switching skill is measured as the difference in time or accuracy on trials where the rule is switched from the previous trial
minus trials when the rule is the same as the previous trial, with lower switching cost as an indication of better switching skill.
Table 2 shows the effect size of the difference in gain on a composite score between the game and control groups in four
experiments. When the students played the game for one hour spread over two sessions in our lab, there was no significant difference
between the gain scores of game and control groups (d = 0.13), but when students played for two hours spread over 4 sessions in our
lab there was a significant difference in gains on shifting skill in each of two different experiments (d = 0.62 and d = 0.78). Finally, in
follow-up experiment not reported in the Parong et al. (2017) paper, when students played for four hours across eight sessions at
home, the game group again showed significantly greater gains on shifting than the control group (d = 0.39).
Overall, this work provides encouraging support for the development of focused computer games based on cognitive principles
and backed by research evidence. In contrast to research showing the ineffectiveness of off-the shelf games to train cognitive skills (in
round 1), and the research showing the ineffectiveness of brain training games to train cognitive skills (in round 2), we found a ray of
promise in research showing the effectiveness of focused games based on cognitive principles. In examining the differences between
ineffective and effective games, we suggest that future research should examine this list of possible active ingredients: repeated
practice on a targeted skill, multiple play contexts in the game in terms of scenes and onscreen elements, high level of challenge
throughout game play including progressively more difficult tasks, embedded feedback to allow the player to improve, and ease of
play. As shown in Fig. 1, we currently are working on a suite of games, each focusing on a different executive function skill: All You
Can ET for shifting skill, Gwakkamole for inhibition skill, and Crush Station for updating skill (or perceptual attention). This work
meshes well with research showing the positive effects of exergaming on executive functions in children (Best, 2012; Flynn & Richert,
2018) and adolescents (Staiano, Abraham, & Calvert, 2012). Braingame Brian (Prins et al., 2013) is intended to train executive
function in children with ADHD, but it requires rigorous testing.
It is useful to distinguish between the design features of an intervention that might be expected to promote learning a particular
cognitive skill per se, and those which may might be expected to promote transfer of the cognitive skill (such as being able to apply a
cognitive skill learned in a game to non-game contexts for academic learning). For example, researchers have proposed that transfer
can be promoted by adding a metacognitive component to cognitive skill training (Espinet, Anderson, & Zelazo, 2013), employing
adaptive training that adjusts to the progress of the learner (Dunning & Holmes, 2014), and verbalizations during learning (Karbach &
Kray, 2009; Kray & Ferdinand, 2013). Our focus is on techniques for fostering transfer of cognitive skills, in which we approach this
classic issue (Singley & Anderson, 1989) using a new training venue of custom-designed computer games.

Table 2
Effect sizes comparing game and control groups on gain in shifting score.
Expt Length Location d

1 1h lab 0.13
2 2h lab 0.62
3 2h lab 0.78
4 4h home 0.39

Note. Experiments 1, 2, and 3 adapted from Parong et al. (2017).

47
R.E. Mayer et al. Cognitive Development 49 (2019) 43–50

Fig. 1. Three focused computer games for teaching executive function skills.

5. What are some next steps in cognitive development in digital playgrounds?

Visionaries foresee a future in which children learn the cognitive skills they need through playing well-designed video games. In
order to explore this provocative idea, we examined what can be called cognitive consequences research, in which the pretest-to-
posttest gains on a cognitive skill are compared between a group that is assigned to play a game (game group) and a group that plays
an alternative game unrelated to the target skill or no game (control group). When we focus on commercially available games–which
can be called off-the-shelf games–we find scant evidence that game playing causes increases in cognitive skills with the major bright
spot being that playing first-person shooting games can cause improvements in perceptual attention skills (Bediou et al., 2018; Mayer,
2014; Sala et al., 2018). Similarly, playing off-the-shelf brain training games also did not produce substantial or widespread gains in
cognitive skills outside the game environment (Bainbridge & Mayer, 2018).
Undaunted by the limitations of off-the-shelf games, we decided to create our own games to teach focused cognitive skills based
on cognitive principles of skill learning, beginning with a game (now called All You Can ET) intended to teach the executive function
skill of shifting–efficiently moving from one task to another. Here we were more successful, showing that playing the game for as little
as two hours across four sessions can cause improvements in shifting skill measured outside the game context as compared to a
control group (Parong et al., 2017).
In short, the theme of this review is that what could have been a sad story about the limitations of game-playing as a vehicle for
fostering cognitive development has turned into a more optimistic tale by virtue of examining custom designed games for targeted
cognitive skills. In contrast to disappointing results concerning the value of off-the-shelf games for promoting cognitive skills, there is
encouraging evidence replicated across three experiments for the pedagogic value of focused games that are specifically designed
based on cognitive principles. Importantly, complementing our game for teaching executive function skills in young adults, a pro-
mising game for improving executive function skills in older adults is NeuroRacer, which also is a focused game specifically designed
based on cognitive principles (Anguera et al., 2013). It is also important to make sure that the content of games is based on evidence-
based analyses of the knowledge needed for success in the targeted academic domain, such as the number skills needed for children’s
development of proficiency in arithmetic (Laski & Siegler, 2014; Ramani & Siegler, 2008).
Some important next steps involve exploring the following issues:

(1) Expansion: Research is needed to determine whether we can obtain comparable results for focused games intended to teach
additional executive function skills, such as inhibition and updating. Even though we have preliminary evidence for training of
shifting skill through game playing, continued research is needed on how to improve learners’ control of their attention during
cognitive activity.
(2) Transfer: Research is needed to determine whether the cognitive skill learned in a game can affect performance on academic tasks
that require the targeted skill. Even though we were able to show that game playing improved cognitive skill performance, the
next step is to examine whether that improvement also transfers to improvements in academic achievement.
(3) Dosage: Research is needed to determine the optimal amount of practice needed to produce positive effects and the effects of
spacing of practice. Some successful studies involving action video games required 20 or even 50 h of play, which may not be
feasible for training of targeted skills such as in All You Can ET (Bediou et al., 2018).
(4) Maintenance: Research is needed to determine how long the effects last and the role of returning to game play as a way to
maintain high levels of performance over time. For example, although we were able to demonstrate gains in shifting skill after
playing All You Can ET, it is worthwhile to explore whether the gains persist across months or even years.
(5) Moderators: Research is needed to determine whether the effects are equivalent for students of different age levels, genders,
achievement levels, motivation, and other characteristics.
(6) Mediators: Research is needed to determine whether improvements in cognitive skill are dependent on internal mechanisms such
as an increase in emotional response during game play (as measured by physiological and brain-based measures).
(7) Active ingredients: Research is to determine which features of a game contribute strongly to producing cognitive skill growth. For
example, our focus in designing All You Can ET was on targeting a specific executive function skill of shifting, providing repeated
practice, creating multiple contexts for training, insuring a high level of challenge throughout, embedding feedback, and
minimizing excessive perceptually distracting onscreen activity. It would be useful to pinpoint which of these (and other) features
are essential for promoting strong gains in cognitive skill.

48
R.E. Mayer et al. Cognitive Development 49 (2019) 43–50

This proposed research agenda is intended to stimulate future research aimed at using game playing as a vehicle for fostering the
development of executive function skills across the age span. This program of research has gone through its first major transi-
tions–moving from off-the-shelf games intended for entertainment or brain training to focused games based on cognitive principles of
skill learning–and is poised for its continued growth as outlined in our research agenda. By taking an evidence-based approach,
grounded in cognitive theory, we may yet be able to tap into the visionaries’ dream of a world in which playing a game is the
homework rather than a reward for doing homework.

Acknowledgements

This paper is based on a talk given at the 47th Annual Meeting of the Jean Piaget Society in San Francisco on June 8, 2017.
Preparation of this paper was supported by Grant R305A150417 from the Institute of Education Sciences and Grant N000141612046
from the Office of Naval Research. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the Institute of
Education Sciences, the U.S. Department of Education, or the Office of Naval Research.

References

Adams, D. M., Pilegard, C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). Evaluating the cognitive consequences of playing Portal for a short duration. Journal of Educational Computing
Research, 54, 173–195.
Anderson, A. F., & Bavelier, D. (2011). Action game play as a tool to enhance perception, attention, and cognition. In S. Tobias, & J. D. Fletcher (Eds.). Computer games
and instruction (pp. 307–330). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Anguera, J. A., Boccanfuso, J., Rintoul, J. L., Al-Hashimi, O., Faraji, F., Janowich, J., ... Gazzaley, A. (2013). Video game training enhances cognitive control in older
adults. Nature, 501(7465), 97–101.
Bainbridge, K., & Mayer, R. E. (2018). Shining the light of research on Lumosity. Journal of Cognitive Enhancement, 2, 43–62.
Ballieux, H., Wass, S. V., Tomalski, P., Kushnerenko, E., & Karmiloff-Smith, A. (2016). Applying gaze-contingent training within community settings to infacts from
diverse SES backgrounds. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 43, 8–17.
Banich, M. T. (2009). Executive function: The search for an integrated account. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(2), 89–94.
Basak, C., Boot, W. R., Voss, M. W., & Kramer, A. F. (2008). Can training in a real-time strategy video game attenuate cognitive decline in older adults? Psychology and
Aging, 23(4), 765–777.
Bediou, B., Adams, D. M., Mayer, R. E., Tipton, E., Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2018). Meta-analysis of action video game impact on perceptual, attentional, and
cognitive skills. Psychological Bulletin, 144(1), 77–110.
Best, J. (2012). Exergaming immediately enhances children’s executive function. Developmental Psychology, 48(5), 1501–1510.
Best, J. R. (2014). Relations between video gaming and children’s executive functions. In F. C. Blumberg (Ed.). Learning by playing: Video gaming in education (pp. 42–
53). New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press.
Best, J. R., Miller, P. H., & Naglieri, J. A. (2011). Relations between executive function and academic achievement from ages 5 to 17 in a large, representative national
sample. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(4), 327–336.
Blumberg, F. C. (Ed.). (2014). Learning by playing: Video gaming in education. New York: Oxford University Press.
Boot, W. R., Kramer, A. F., Simons, D. J., Fabian, M., & Gratton, G. (2008). The effects of video game playing on attention, memory, and executive control. Acta
Psychologica, 129, 387–398.
Cameron, C. E., Brock, L. L., Murrah, W. M., Bell, L. H., Worzalla, S. L., Grissmer, D., & Morrison, F. J. (2012). Fine motor skills and executive function both contribute
to kindergarten achievement. Child Development, 83(4), 1229–1244.
Chiang, H. L., & Gau, S. S. F. (2014). Impact of executive functions on school and peer functions in youths with ADHD. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 35(5),
963–972.
Diamond, A., & Lee, K. (2011). Interventions shown to aid executive function development in children 4 to 12 years old. Science, 333(6045), 959–964.
Dovis, S., Van der Oord, S., Wiers, R. W., & Prins, P. J. (2015). Improving executive functioning in children with ADHD: Training multiple executive functions within
the context of a computer game. A randomized double-blind placebo controlled trial. PLoS One, 10(4), e0121651.
Dunning, D. L., & Holmes, J. (2014). Does working memory training promote the use of strategies on untrained working memory tasks? Memory & Cognition, 42(6),
854–862.
Ericsson, K. A. (2006). The influence of experience and deliberate practice on the development of superior expert performance. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J.
Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.). The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 683–703). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Espinet, S. D., Anderson, J. E., & Zelazo, P. D. (2013). Reflection training improves executive function in preschool-age children: Behavioral and neural effects.
Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 4, 3–15.
Flynn, R. M., & Richert, R. A. (2018). Cognitive, not physical, engagement in video gaming influences executive functioning. Journal of Cognition and Development,
19(1), 1–20.
Gee, J. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Glass, B. D., Maddox, W. T., & Love, B. C. (2013). Real-time strategy game training: Emergence of a cognitive flexibility trait. PLoS One, 8(8), e70350.
Goldstein, J., Cajko, L., Oosterbroek, M., Michielsen, M., van Houten, O., & Salverda, F. (1997). Video games and the elderly. Social Behavior and Personality, 25(4),
345–352.
Green, C. S., Sugarman, M. A., Medford, K., Klobusicky, E., & Bavelier, D. (2012). The Effect of action video game experience of task-switching. Computers in Human
Behavior, 28, 984–994.
Greenfield, P. M. (1996). Video games as cultural artifacts. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 15(1), 3–12.
Haiko, B., Wass, S., Tomalski, P., Kushnerenko, E., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Johnson, M. H., & Moore, D. G. (2016). Applying gaze-contingent training within community
settings to infants from diverse SES backgrounds. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 43, 8–17.
Homer, B. D., Ober, T. M., & Flynn, R. M. (2018). Children and adolescents’ development of executive functions in digital contexts. Proceedings of technology, mind, and
society. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
Homer, B. D., Plass, J. L., Raffaele, C., Ober, T. M., & Ali, A. (2017). Improving high school students’ executive functions through digital game play. Computers &
Education, 117, 50–58.
Honey, M., & Hilton, M. (Eds.). (2011). Learning science through computer games and simulations.. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Hulme, C., & Melby-Lervag, M. (2012). Current evidence does not support the claims made for Cog-Med working memory training. Journal of Applied Research in
Memory and Cognition, 1, 197–200.
Kapp, K. M. (2012). The gamification of learning and instruction. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Karbach, J., & Kray, J. (2009). How useful is executive control training? Age differences in near and far transfer of task‐switching training. Developmental Science,
12(6), 978–990.
Klingberg, T., Fernell, E., Olesen, P. J., Johnson, M., Gustafsson, P., Dahlström, K., ... Westerberg, H. (2005). Computerized training of working memory in children
with ADHD-a randomized, controlled trial. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 44(2), 177–186.

49
R.E. Mayer et al. Cognitive Development 49 (2019) 43–50

Kray, J., & Ferdinand, N. K. (2013). How to improve cognitive control in development during childhood: Potentials and limits of cognitive interventions. Child
Development Perspectives, 7(2), 121–125.
Laski, E. V., & Siegler, R. S. (2014). Learning from number board games: You learn what you encode. Developmental Psychology, 50, 853–864.
Loftus, G. R., & Loftus, E. F. (1983). Mind at play: The psychology of video games. New York: Basic Books.
Loosli, S. V., Buschkuehl, M., Perrig, W. J., & Jaeggi, S. M. (2012). Working memory training improves reading processes in typically developing children. Child
Neuropsychology, 178, 62–78.
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2014). Computer games for learning: An evidence-based approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2016). What should be the role of computer games in education? Policy Insights from Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), 20–26.
Mayer, R. E. (in press). Computer games in education. Annual Review of Psychology.
McGonical, J. (2011). Reality is broken: How games make us better and they can change the world. New York: Penguin Press.
Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., & Howerter, A. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex’
frontal lobe’ tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 49–100.
Nouchi, R., Yasuyuki, T., Takeuchi, H., Hashizume, H., Akitsuki, Y., Shigemune, Y., & Kawashima, R. (2012). Brain training game improves executive functions and
processing speed in the elderly: A randomized controlled trial. PLoS One, 7(1), e29676.
O’Neil, H. F., & Perez, R. S. (Eds.). (2008). Computer games and team and individual learning. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Parong, J., Mayer, R. E., Fiorella, L., MacNamara, A., Plass, J., & Homer, B. (2017). Learning executive function skills by playing focused video games. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 51, 141–151.
Pellicano, E., Kenny, L., Brede, J., Klaric, E., Lichwa, H., & McMillin, R. (2017). Executive function predicts school readiness in autistic and typical preschool children.
Cognitive Development, 43, 1–13.
Pilegard, C., & Mayer, R. E. (in press). Game over for Tetris as a platform for cognitive skill training. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 00, 000-000.
Prensky, M. (2006). Don’t bother me mom: I’m learning. St. Paul, MN: Paragon Press.
Prins, P. J., Brink, E. T., Dovis, S., Ponsioen, A., Geurts, H. M., De Vries, M., & Van Der Oord, S. (2013). “Braingame Brian”: Toward an executive function training
program with game elements for children with ADHD and cognitive control problems. Games for Health: Research, Development, and Clinical Applications, 2(1),
44–49.
Ramani, G. B., & Siegler, R. S. (2008). Promoting broad and stable improvements in low-income children’s numerical knowledge through playing number board games.
Child Development, 79, 375–394.
Robinson, K. E., Kaizar, E., Catroppa, C., Godfrey, C., & Yeates, K. O. (2014). Systematic review and meta-analysis of cognitive interventions for children with central
nervous system disorders and neurodevelopmental disorders. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 39(8), 846–865.
Sala, G., Tatlidil, K. S., & Gobet, F. (2018). Video game training does not enhance cognitive ability: A comprehensive meta-analytic investigation. Psychological Bulletin,
144(2), 111–139.
Schafer, D. W. (2006). How computer games help children learn. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Squire, K. (2011). Video games and learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
Shaul, S., & Schwartz, M. (2014). The role of the executive functions in school readiness among preschool-age children. Reading and Writing, 27(4), 749–768.
Sims, V. K., & Mayer, R. E. (2002). Domain specificity of spatial expertise: The case of video game players. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 97–115.
Singley, M. K., & Anderson, J. R. (1989). The transfer of cognitive skill. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Staiano, A. E., Abraham, A. A., & Calvert, S. L. (2012). Competitive versus cooperative exergame play for African American adolescents’ executive function skills:
Short-term effects in a long-term training intervention. Developmental Psychology, 48(2), 337–342.
St. Clair-Thompson, H. L., & Gathercole, S. E. (2006). Executive functions and achievements in school: Shifting, updating, inhibition, and working memory. The
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(4), 745–759.
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662.
Subrahmanyam, K., & Greenfield, P. M. (1994). Effect of video game practice on spatial skills in girls and boys. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 15(1),
13–32.
Thorell, L. B., Lindqvist, S., Bergman Nutley, S., Bohlin, G., & Klingberg, T. (2009). Training and transfer effects of executive functions in preschool children.
Developmental Science, 12(1), 106–113.
Tobias, S., Fletcher, J. D., Dai, D. Y., & Wind, A. P. (2011). Review of research on computer games. In S. Tobias, & J. D. Fletcher (Eds.). Computer games and instruction
(pp. 525–545). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Whitlock, L. A., McLaughlin, A. C., & Allaire, J. C. (2012). Individual difference in response to cognitive training: Using a multi-modal attentionally demanding game-
based intervention for older adults. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(4), 1091–1096.
Wouters, P., & van Oostendorp, H. (Eds.). (2017). Instructional techniques to facilitate learning and motivation of serious games. New York: Springer.
Zelazo, P. D. (2006). The Dimensional Change Card Sort (DCCS): A method of assessin executive function in children. Nature Protocols, 1(1), 297–301.
Zelazo, P. D. (2015). Executive function: Reflection, iterative reprocessing, complexity, and the developing brain. Developmental Review, 38, 55–68.

50