French Researcher: Brain Age Games 'Charlatanism'
A French professor from the University of Rennes has denounced Dr. Kawashima's brain-biggening blockbuster, Brain Age, and its peers; Professor Alain Lieury (pictured, massaging his brain) studied four groups of 10-year-olds working on problems of logic, math, memorization and symbol interpretation. Two of the groups finished a seven-week memory course on the DS, while two did not.
After the course, the DSers fared no better than the non-DS group - in some cases, they performed even worse.
Lieury's conclusions left little room for doubt:
The Nintendo DS is a technological jewel. As a game it's fine. But it is charlatanism to claim that it is a scientific test.
There were few positive effects [shown in Lieury's research] and they were weak. Dr Kawashima is one of a long list of dream merchants.
This really shouldn't come as a surprise. While Brain Age is fun, and it certainly refreshed my memory concerning multiplication tables, you'd have to be drinking a lot of Nintendo Kool-Aid to think that playing Brain Age is going to turn tots into Teslas.
But while Dr. Kawashima's claims may be hard to swallow, I'm still not convinced that they qualify as "charlatanism." I challenge anyone to pick up the New York Times Crossword puzzle every day for a month and not have a noticeable improvement in vocabulary and recall.
And as for Dr. Kawashima, what else is a game maker if not a "dream merchant?"
Researcher: Brainy Nintendo DS Claims Are "Charlatanism" [GamePolitics]
tiny dancer
Posted to Miscellany on 26 January 2009
· Comments (5)
Other stuff like this: brain age, ds, nintendo, ryuta kawashima
Wait, so I've been playing that game just for fun? And all that time I spent on planes was ultimately for nothing more than pure entertainment value?
...I feel so violated.
I don't believe Nintendo has ever said that Brain Age will make you smarter. It's designed to help you improve brain function.
I don't think it's really designed for 10 year olds, who will already presumably be doing math problems on a regular basis.
I also don't know of many real scientists who would be willing to call people a "charlatan" after one study, especially one that contradicts with some others already done.
He sounds like an "internet scientist" to me.
To be honest, I believe that Messieur Lieury is just trying to get some attention.
As for the validity of his results, I would have to read his article/paper/book and decide for myself. Which is strange because I found no references to peer-reviewed publications from him.
On the other hand, I did attend a presentation by Dr. Kawashima at last year's ACE conference in Yokohama, and I must say I was quite convinced, and that Kawashima's results based on brain activity analysis were quite more direct and convincing than an observation of 10-year-olds.
Lieury might have (let's say) literally given Math tests for the children to solve in the end, and the lack of motivation might have influenced the results. Performing tests with children is hard and many times misleading because they might just not be motivated enough and so become less responsive to the tests themselves.
My two cents, there you have them ;)
Professor Lieury's study is entirely beside the point, as Brain Age is not a "memory course." Yes, it may include a few memory exercises here and there, but its primary benefit (and indeed its alleged purpose) is only to give your brain a few good minutes of stimulation on a daily basis. I would think that getting a nootropic effect similar to that achieved by caffeine or amphetamines, without all the nasty health risks, and not just letting my brain wither from non-use as I age would be a good thing, but that's just my word against the word of the bloviating bigshot "scientist."