New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Online Data Trove Exposes Our Cognitive Quirks

A brain-training company's huge data set reveals nuances of learning and intelligence

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

When scientists study how we think, they usually design their experiments to control as many variables as possible. Though essential for careful science, these expensive measures restrict research in many ways: most psychology studies are conducted on small groups of Western undergraduates over short periods. Most scientists agree we could learn more from longer studies of larger, more diverse populations, but until recently acquiring such data proved nearly impossible. Now the vast data sets of an online brain-training company, Lumos Labs, are offering insights that have been out of reach for traditional laboratories.

Lumos runs Lumosity.com, a popular brain-training Web site. More than 40 million participants of many ages and nationalities train on the site, some for many years, by taking psychology tests from home. The activities involve, among other things, rapidly solving arithmetic problems or typing words of various lengths when given a word stem. Some participants also volunteer health and lifestyle information.

In a recent paper in Frontiers of Human Neuroscience, scientists at Lumos, the University of Michigan and Duke University analyzed the information gathered from these psychology tests—the largest ever data set on human cognition. In one study, the team looked at data from upward of 100,000 diverse participants and determined that higher levels of daily alcohol consumption are associated with ever steeper declines in performance. Unlike earlier work on the cognitive costs of drinking, the new study revealed that each additional drink beyond two a day causes a greater drop in performance than the one before.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


In another analysis, the scientists compared more than 22,000 participants of different ages to see how much they improved on tests of memory and reasoning over long periods. They confirmed previous findings that intuition and reasoning, or fluid intelligence, declines faster with age and improves less with training than memory for facts and skills, known as crystallized intelligence. Yet they also found that the ability to improve on tasks worsens with age regardless of how good you are at the outset—old dogma claims that improvement is easier if you start at a low level.

The scientists are careful to point out that the conclusions reached on this type of data must come with some caveats. Participants train from home instead of in a lab, leaving open to question many variables researchers cannot see or control for, such as dishonesty about age or behavior. In addition, the subjects still may not be representative of the general population—perhaps people who choose to use Lumosity differ in some fundamental way from those who do not. Nevertheless, the Internet offers a unique, cost-effective way of studying human cognition on a huge scale. Big data has already become central to genomics research, explains Lumos data scientist Daniel Sternberg. Cognition “is orders of magnitude more complicated.”

SA Mind Vol 24 Issue 5This article was published with the title “Online Data Trove Exposes Our Cognitive Quirks” in SA Mind Vol. 24 No. 5 (), p. 18
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind1113-18b

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe