At the University of Cambridge, the Decoder game application has been developed, which can really improve a person's concentration and memory skills. Its authors back up their findings with research results and data on neurobiological tests performed by volunteers. But there are those who assert - this is not a deception, but simply slyness.
To evaluate the effectiveness of Decoder, its developers used a typical Cambridge test: an automated assessment of fast visual information. At the university, it is considered a reliable measure of the attention level of students. 75 people were divided into three groups, one of which trained with Decoder for 8 hours a month, another spent the same amount of time playing bingo, and the third was a control group.
Testing was conducted according to academic rules and clearly showed an increase in attention among those who spent time on Decoder in comparison with other participants in the experiment. And this is the main problem - the advantage is expressed in the assessments of the test, which are easy to dispute, which was done by skeptics. Some say that Cambridge specially tailored the Decoder algorithms for their proprietary test. Others claim that such measurements are always divorced from reality and a priori meaningless.
Scientists at universities in London, Nottingham and Trent criticized their colleagues for choosing the same exercises they trained to test the results of brain training. In that case, did the test subjects really develop their mental skills, or did they just sharpen their ability to execute specific algorithms? And what objectivity of the assessment can then be said? Now, if the students trained according to one method, and the tests passed according to a different system and showed an increase in attentiveness, then we could talk about a breakthrough.