|
Neuroscience Junior Tutorial |
Week 1
Klingberg et al. 2002. Training of Working Memory in Children With ADHD. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 24(6).Assignment: Read the paper, and answer the following two questions. In addition, write down at least one question you have about the experimental design or results of this paper.
- How many minutes a day did the ADHD active vs. placebo groups use the computerized training program?
- What do the black and white dots represent in Figure 1? Why are there 7 black dots in Fig1a and 1b but only 5 in 1c?
Week 2
Dahlin et al. 2008. Transfer of Learning After Updating Training Mediated by the Striatum. Science 320. Supplementary Material.Assignment: Read the paper, and answer the following two questions. In addition, write down at least one question you have about the experimental design or results of this paper.
- How many tasks were used during training? What were they?
- What type of control groups were used in the experiments?
Week 3
Week 3: Takeuchi et al. 2010. Training of Working Memory Impacts Structural Connectivity. Journal of Neuroscience 30(9).Assignment: Read the paper, and answer the following two questions. In addition, write down at least one question you have about the experimental design or results of this paper.
- The abstract states that "amount of working memory training correlated with increased FA." How do they measure amount of working memory training? What is their argument for not correlating with subjects' increase in performance instead?
- Figures 2 and 3 show that the number of training sessions varied between 50 and 170 across subjects. What determined the number of training sessions for each subject?
Week 4
Gevensleben et al. 2009. Is neurofeedback an efficacious treatment for ADHD? A randomised controlled clinical trial. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 50(7).Assignment: Read the paper, and answer the following two questions. In addition, write down at least one question you have about the experimental design or results of this paper.
- How did the researchers determine how many subjects to enroll in the study?
- We previously discussed the "Cohen's d" measure of effect size, which is reported in this study to be 0.60. Can you show how this was calculated from the data? How should we interpret a d of 0.60?