skip to main content

This page has been archived and is no longer being updated regularly.

Judicial Notebook

APA Style leaf logo Cite This Article in APA Style
Robbennolt, J. K. (2016, September 1). Judicial notebook: 'Brain games': Helpful tool or false promise? Monitor on Psychology, 47(8). https://www.apa.org/monitor/2016/09/jn

In January 2016, Lumos Labs, the creators of the Lumosity "brain training" games, agreed to settle charges related to deceptive advertising brought against them by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC). According to the company's literature, Lumosity offers a "personalized brain training program" and related assessment measures, as well as an assortment of games "targeting cognitive abilities such as memory, attention, speed, flexibility and problem-solving." Subscriptions to Lumosity range from a monthly fee of $14.95 to a lifetime subscription of $299.95.

In its complaint, the FTC charged that the company deceptively claimed that scientific research demonstrated that using Lumosity "will improve performance on everyday tasks; will improve school, work, and athletic performance; will delay age-related decline in memory and protect against other age-related conditions such as mild cognitive impairment, dementia, and Alzheimer's disease; and will reduce cognitive impairment associated with the side effects of chemotherapy, post-traumatic stress disorder, traumatic brain injury, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, Turner syndrome, stroke, and other health conditions." In addition, the FTC charged that the company presented consumer testimonials that were obtained through contests that offered substantial prizes, but that the company did not disclose to consumers how these testimonials were obtained.

Settlement reached. Lumos Labs did not admit or deny the FTC's allegations, but the company agreed to the terms of the settlement. In particular, the settlement prohibits the company from making claims about Lumosity's effects on performance, memory decline or cognitive impairment, unless the claim is "non-misleading" and based on "competent and reliable scientific evidence."

The company was also required to pay $2 million, to notify subscribers of the settlement, to provide subscribers with an easy way to opt out of their automatically renewing subscriptions, and to correct its practices regarding endorsement.

What the research says. Lumosity is an example of the "brain training" software that comprises a growing segment of the computer software market. Psychological scientists have studied and debated the effects of such games. Importantly, researchers have found that the brain is malleable and that this flexibility persists across the life span. In addition, research has begun to explore the connections between brain exercises and cognitive functions. But more is needed. In particular, rigorous research about the effects of different kinds of brain exercises, the transferability of these effects, the extent to which the effects persist, and the mechanisms underlying any improvement will help to further our understanding of cognitive health and cognitive decline.

At the same time, psychologists have explored other ways to improve brain health—such as physical exercise. As one group of psychologists advises, consumers ought to "keep in mind opportunity costs. Time spent playing the games is time not spent reading, socializing, gardening, exercising, or engaging in many other activities that may benefit cognitive and physical health of older adults."

As the research develops, companies such as Lumos Labs will need to work to make sure that claims about their products are based on the available science. In this case, the FTC concluded that the claims outstripped the science. As noted by Jessica Rich, director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, "Lumosity preyed on consumers' fears about age-related cognitive decline, suggesting their games could stave off memory loss, dementia and even Alzheimer's disease. But Lumosity simply did not have the science to back up its ads."

"Judicial Notebook" is a project of APA's Div. 9 (Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues).

The verdict

There is not enough research to show that brain games lead to the cognitive gains claimed by some companies.

The content I just read:

Recommended Reading

Letters to the Editor