This podcast was made on the lands of the Wurundjeri people, the Woi-wurrung and the Bunurong. We'd like to pay respects to their elders, past and present and emerging.

This podcast was made on the lands of the Wurundjeri people, the Woi-wurrung and the Bunurong. We'd like to pay respects to their elders, past and present and emerging.

From the Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences at the University of Melbourne. This is PsychTalks.

From the Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences at the University of Melbourne. This is PsychTalks.

Hello and thanks for joining us again for another episode of PsychTalks. I'm Professor Nick Haslam, a social psychologist. Normally, I'd be accompanied by Associate Professor Cassie Haywood, an applied psychologist. But unfortunately, she's not able to come here today. In this episode, we're putting the microscope on cognitive development. In particular, we'll focus on what's called executive functions, how these executive functions evolve and what their impact on us is exactly. And to help us, we're joined by Professor Iroise Dumontheil.

Hello and thanks for joining us again for another episode of PsychTalks. I'm Professor Nick Haslam, a social psychologist. Normally, I'd be accompanied by Associate Professor Cassie Haywood, an applied psychologist. But unfortunately, she's not able to come here today. In this episode, we're putting the microscope on cognitive development. In particular, we'll focus on what's called executive functions, how these executive functions evolve and what their impact on us is exactly. And to help us, we're joined by Professor Iroise Dumontheil.

Hello and welcome to PsychTalks, Iroise.

Hello and welcome to PsychTalks, Iroise.

Thanks for having me.

Thanks for having me.

So just to start off, can you say a little bit about your background? How you came to be in Melbourne?

So just to start off, can you say a little bit about your background? How you came to be in Melbourne?

Yes, I'm French originally, but I spent a lot of my university time in the UK, except for a few periods of Postdoc in Stockholm in Sweden, which I enjoyed very much, and after 20 years or so in London, I migrated to Melbourne last year.

Yes, I'm French originally, but I spent a lot of my university time in the UK, except for a few periods of Postdoc in Stockholm in Sweden, which I enjoyed very much, and after 20 years or so in London, I migrated to Melbourne last year.

So, Iroise, your work is deeply rooted in an area called developmental, cognitive neuroscience and educational neuroscience.

So, Iroise, your work is deeply rooted in an area called developmental, cognitive neuroscience and educational neuroscience.

Yes, so developmental cognitive neuroscience is the study of brain development. So, we use new methods of brain imaging to look at the brain structure and brain function and how these changes during development allow the development of cognitive capacities. So being able to remember more things, attend better and things like that. While educational neuroscience is trying to link this research to educational research and teaching practices to see whether what we are learning from developmental cognitive neuroscience can be informative for education

Yes, so developmental cognitive neuroscience is the study of brain development. So, we use new methods of brain imaging to look at the brain structure and brain function and how these changes during development allow the development of cognitive capacities. So being able to remember more things, attend better and things like that. While educational neuroscience is trying to link this research to educational research and teaching practices to see whether what we are learning from developmental cognitive neuroscience can be informative for education

Sounds very cutting edge. And I imagine researchers in these fields study a whole range of different brain functions. But one concept that stands out in your own work is executive functions. Could you explain what these functions are and how they develop during childhood and adolescence?

Sounds very cutting edge. And I imagine researchers in these fields study a whole range of different brain functions. But one concept that stands out in your own work is executive functions. Could you explain what these functions are and how they develop during childhood and adolescence?

Yes, so cognitive control or executive function- so executive, it's a bit like the CEO in a company. They coordinate other aspects of cognition like perception, attention, action to achieve your goals. And they're particularly important when we're faced with situations where your routine behaviours (automatic thoughts) are not sufficient, so what you do normally does- is not enough. So, for example, if you're driving home but your usual route is blocked by roadwork, then you need to cancel your normal route, or inhibit it and instead plan an alternative route. And so executive functions that have been studied in particular include working memory, which allow us to keep information in mind and manipulate it. For example, if you're trying to calculate how to split the bill at the end of the dinner, you have to kind of think of how many people are there, and I can think about all these numbers. Or inhibitory control, which allow us to stop an automatic or dominant behaviours or thoughts like you keep wanting to eat some cake. Or cognitive flexibility, which is the ability to shift between goals or rules or tasks. So, like a kid will speak differently to their friend or to their teacher to their parent or grandparent and developmental cognitive neuroscience research in the last 25 years or so have shown that executive functions and the brain networks that support executive functions continue to mature well into adolescence.

Yes, so cognitive control or executive function- so executive, it's a bit like the CEO in a company. They coordinate other aspects of cognition like perception, attention, action to achieve your goals. And they're particularly important when we're faced with situations where your routine behaviours (automatic thoughts) are not sufficient, so what you do normally does- is not enough. So, for example, if you're driving home but your usual route is blocked by roadwork, then you need to cancel your normal route, or inhibit it and instead plan an alternative route. And so executive functions that have been studied in particular include working memory, which allow us to keep information in mind and manipulate it. For example, if you're trying to calculate how to split the bill at the end of the dinner, you have to kind of think of how many people are there, and I can think about all these numbers. Or inhibitory control, which allow us to stop an automatic or dominant behaviours or thoughts like you keep wanting to eat some cake. Or cognitive flexibility, which is the ability to shift between goals or rules or tasks. So, like a kid will speak differently to their friend or to their teacher to their parent or grandparent and developmental cognitive neuroscience research in the last 25 years or so have shown that executive functions and the brain networks that support executive functions continue to mature well into adolescence.

I wish you hadn't mentioned cake. So these executive functions why are they so crucial for educational outcomes?

I wish you hadn't mentioned cake. So these executive functions why are they so crucial for educational outcomes?

Because they allow us to think and behave in novel contexts. And usually everything we learn is new. So, in a broad way, executive functions help children pay attention also to what the teacher is saying not be distracted, remember to do their homework and manipulate abstract thoughts. So, all this enables them to be in the right place mentally, to learn at school. But also, when we learn new things, it's a novel situation. We have to kind of figure out what to do, how to maintain that in our mind. And that's all really relevant for the educational context.

Because they allow us to think and behave in novel contexts. And usually everything we learn is new. So, in a broad way, executive functions help children pay attention also to what the teacher is saying not be distracted, remember to do their homework and manipulate abstract thoughts. So, all this enables them to be in the right place mentally, to learn at school. But also, when we learn new things, it's a novel situation. We have to kind of figure out what to do, how to maintain that in our mind. And that's all really relevant for the educational context.

Right. So kids can't just sit in a classroom and be sponges, in other words.

Right. So kids can't just sit in a classroom and be sponges, in other words.

No, they have to attend. So if they are looking outside, listening to their friend, they are not going to be listening to what the teacher is saying. And so, they are not going to learn that particular concept at that time. Research suggests that teachers have to repeat the same thing at least three or four times because one time the kid is looking for something in their bag, another time they are talking to their friend, and one time they heard the teacher.

No, they have to attend. So if they are looking outside, listening to their friend, they are not going to be listening to what the teacher is saying. And so, they are not going to learn that particular concept at that time. Research suggests that teachers have to repeat the same thing at least three or four times because one time the kid is looking for something in their bag, another time they are talking to their friend, and one time they heard the teacher.

Makes sense. So how about STEM disciplines like science and mathematics in particular?

Makes sense. So how about STEM disciplines like science and mathematics in particular?

Yes. So if we take the example of arithmetic because often we talk about maths. But really, in cognitive neuroscience research, we look at arithmetic, which is like a simpler, more limited part of maths. There is evidence that when children first learn arithmetic, facts like four plus six equals 10 or four times six equals 24. They use the frontal parts of their brain, which are very much involved in executive functioning. Well, when these facts become well learned, so they are more automatized, then we see increased activation in the parietal regions at the back of the brain. So we have to have this shift between when something is new, we use a frontal cortex. When something is kind of automatized, it's the back of the brain. But then, if you ask an adult to calculate, you know 35 times 12, then they will need to decompose this multiplication into different bits, and they will need to keep that information in mind. So they will need them working memory to to solve it. So working memory helps us manipulate new concepts, new facts and integrate them with existing knowledge we already have. And that's really what is the key component of learning. And what education is striving to do is to make connections between old and new knowledge and executive functions really allow us to do that because we're keeping in mind the new bit, the old information and consolidating them and linking them together. And those links is what helps us remember it long term.

Yes. So if we take the example of arithmetic because often we talk about maths. But really, in cognitive neuroscience research, we look at arithmetic, which is like a simpler, more limited part of maths. There is evidence that when children first learn arithmetic, facts like four plus six equals 10 or four times six equals 24. They use the frontal parts of their brain, which are very much involved in executive functioning. Well, when these facts become well learned, so they are more automatized, then we see increased activation in the parietal regions at the back of the brain. So we have to have this shift between when something is new, we use a frontal cortex. When something is kind of automatized, it's the back of the brain. But then, if you ask an adult to calculate, you know 35 times 12, then they will need to decompose this multiplication into different bits, and they will need to keep that information in mind. So they will need them working memory to to solve it. So working memory helps us manipulate new concepts, new facts and integrate them with existing knowledge we already have. And that's really what is the key component of learning. And what education is striving to do is to make connections between old and new knowledge and executive functions really allow us to do that because we're keeping in mind the new bit, the old information and consolidating them and linking them together. And those links is what helps us remember it long term.

Are there differences between individuals and groups?

Are there differences between individuals and groups?

Yeah, so like most human traits, there are a lot of individual differences in executive function abilities. Some of them are, you know, who have a genetic origin, Um, but also environmental origins. For example, one of my students, Roisin Perry. She's analysing a cohort trying to look at markers of socioeconomic status, how different markers might predict development of executive function. And a lot of research has been done looking at very early childhood and low SES children tend to be less ready to start school. But we were looking at adolescence. So how long would this influence continue to last, and she found that markers like parental occupation and very low family income influence developmental trajectory of executive functions into adolescence as well.

Yeah, so like most human traits, there are a lot of individual differences in executive function abilities. Some of them are, you know, who have a genetic origin, Um, but also environmental origins. For example, one of my students, Roisin Perry. She's analysing a cohort trying to look at markers of socioeconomic status, how different markers might predict development of executive function. And a lot of research has been done looking at very early childhood and low SES children tend to be less ready to start school. But we were looking at adolescence. So how long would this influence continue to last, and she found that markers like parental occupation and very low family income influence developmental trajectory of executive functions into adolescence as well.

So, do these environmental effects on executive functions matter for academic achievement?

So, do these environmental effects on executive functions matter for academic achievement?

So, there is evidence that children of higher working memory tend to do better in arithmetic and even adolescents. Again, we've found that those kids who had better working memory at age 11/12 tended to do better in the UK in these GCSEs. So the age 16 standardised test in maths, science and English, even when you control for earlier academic achievement. So how much information you can keep in mind and manipulate over the course of adolescence continues to affect how well you're doing at school.

So, there is evidence that children of higher working memory tend to do better in arithmetic and even adolescents. Again, we've found that those kids who had better working memory at age 11/12 tended to do better in the UK in these GCSEs. So the age 16 standardised test in maths, science and English, even when you control for earlier academic achievement. So how much information you can keep in mind and manipulate over the course of adolescence continues to affect how well you're doing at school.

So given those really interesting individual differences, what should teachers do if the students they've got in their classroom vary a lot in the maturity of their executive functions and, of course, other aspects of their cognitive development as well? How can they enhance learning for all at once? How can you personalise education?

So given those really interesting individual differences, what should teachers do if the students they've got in their classroom vary a lot in the maturity of their executive functions and, of course, other aspects of their cognitive development as well? How can they enhance learning for all at once? How can you personalise education?

This is a very big question, so and that's one of the key aims of educational neuroscience. How can we help teachers with that first identify the strengths and weaknesses of certain children and how to help them according to their strength and weaknesses? And teachers are already very aware of the fact that children in a single classroom vary hugely in their abilities in different domains, whether that's literacy, numeracy, science, art, music and sport. But because of individual differences in executive function, some children may be more easily distracted by things like decorations in a classroom or by a chatty school friend. Or they might not be able to remember four instructions. So an example we give is like if the teacher says, "Put your English book down, take your math notebook, a blue pen and come sit on the floor." Some kids are just lost after the two first instructions, and it might be like wandering around looking like they're lost or not attending. But it was actually too much information, or they might not be able to solve mental arithmetic problems at the same age as others. And all this will impact their learning because if they keep missing out on some information, gradually, you can get behind. So, what we're trying to think about is how we can help teachers be more aware of these particular executive function differences and how that might impact children in the classroom. So, for example, you know, not gives as many instructions. And sometimes if you have a routine that helps children because again, when it's automatic, you don't need your executive functions in the same way. But a bigger question for education is whether we want education to permit every child to reach their full potential or for all children to achieve a minimum goal standard level. And these two goals lead to quite different approaches and to teaching groups of children with varied abilities. And it's not really a question for developmental, cognitive neuroscientist or educational neuroscientist to answer. It's a society question, but it will affect what advice we might give on how to help children and how to teach in the classroom.

This is a very big question, so and that's one of the key aims of educational neuroscience. How can we help teachers with that first identify the strengths and weaknesses of certain children and how to help them according to their strength and weaknesses? And teachers are already very aware of the fact that children in a single classroom vary hugely in their abilities in different domains, whether that's literacy, numeracy, science, art, music and sport. But because of individual differences in executive function, some children may be more easily distracted by things like decorations in a classroom or by a chatty school friend. Or they might not be able to remember four instructions. So an example we give is like if the teacher says, "Put your English book down, take your math notebook, a blue pen and come sit on the floor." Some kids are just lost after the two first instructions, and it might be like wandering around looking like they're lost or not attending. But it was actually too much information, or they might not be able to solve mental arithmetic problems at the same age as others. And all this will impact their learning because if they keep missing out on some information, gradually, you can get behind. So, what we're trying to think about is how we can help teachers be more aware of these particular executive function differences and how that might impact children in the classroom. So, for example, you know, not gives as many instructions. And sometimes if you have a routine that helps children because again, when it's automatic, you don't need your executive functions in the same way. But a bigger question for education is whether we want education to permit every child to reach their full potential or for all children to achieve a minimum goal standard level. And these two goals lead to quite different approaches and to teaching groups of children with varied abilities. And it's not really a question for developmental, cognitive neuroscientist or educational neuroscientist to answer. It's a society question, but it will affect what advice we might give on how to help children and how to teach in the classroom.

So are these advances that you're making finding their way into teacher training yet or that down the track a bit?

So are these advances that you're making finding their way into teacher training yet or that down the track a bit?

There is a push to do that, but it's very hard. First, teacher training is not very long. Well, it depends. Different countries do it very differently. And in some countries like Finland, it's a masters. You have a kind of very long training, and they cover actually a lot of that. And they do very well in PISA and things like this. In other countries, it's very condensed. In one year, you do learn bits about teaching, and you actually also practise- start practising teaching so you don't have time to actually put too much extra. But there is really a push and kind of, working with Faculty of Education teacher training to see how much we can actually insert into the teacher training, removing maybe some facts actually, what we call "neuro myths". So things about learning styles or using 10% of our brain, if actually we can kind of get rid of some of that and replace them with maybe more, not necessarily cognitive neuroscience based but developmental psychology knowledge about learning development that would be useful for teachers. But it's going to be a slow, a slow progress.

There is a push to do that, but it's very hard. First, teacher training is not very long. Well, it depends. Different countries do it very differently. And in some countries like Finland, it's a masters. You have a kind of very long training, and they cover actually a lot of that. And they do very well in PISA and things like this. In other countries, it's very condensed. In one year, you do learn bits about teaching, and you actually also practise- start practising teaching so you don't have time to actually put too much extra. But there is really a push and kind of, working with Faculty of Education teacher training to see how much we can actually insert into the teacher training, removing maybe some facts actually, what we call "neuro myths". So things about learning styles or using 10% of our brain, if actually we can kind of get rid of some of that and replace them with maybe more, not necessarily cognitive neuroscience based but developmental psychology knowledge about learning development that would be useful for teachers. But it's going to be a slow, a slow progress.

You've done a lot of work on what you call cognitive training. So what forms does that take? And does it show promise in improving educational outcomes? What does the evidence say?

You've done a lot of work on what you call cognitive training. So what forms does that take? And does it show promise in improving educational outcomes? What does the evidence say?

Well, one form of cognitive training is a sort of brain training games that became really popular maybe 10 years ago. But they're still very present in the app world, and they all claim to benefit your cognition. So that's kind of one form of it. And because executive functions were associated with so many outcomes and, you know, educational achievement but also mental health, researchers thought that if we exercised executive function with this type of games, then by repeatedly playing these games that tax your executive function, make it work hard, for example, remembering, you know, number of words, locations, objects in a gamified way to make it more engaging. Then we would improve executive function and then down the line we would improve arithmetic, academic outcome, mental health outcomes, et cetera. Unfortunately, meta-analysis of this type of research indicate that, for example, in the case of working memory, performance on the games themselves improve. Performance on other types, similar working memory tasks improves, too, and that's what we call near transfer, so you can improve working memory. But unfortunately, there is no what we call far transfer, so improving work memory doesn't lead to improvement in reasoning or maths. So this is very disappointing, but because that would have been great if kids are doing badly in maths because they've got poor work memory, we train this work memory using games, and then they do better in maths. And what it suggests is that the learning and the brain, the way the brain supports learning is in specific ways. So we learn about maths, maybe working memory for maths facts, manipulating numbers so we don't have these domain general working memory capacity that once we improve, it improves everything. So we're finding it's hard to generalise skills to other domains.

Well, one form of cognitive training is a sort of brain training games that became really popular maybe 10 years ago. But they're still very present in the app world, and they all claim to benefit your cognition. So that's kind of one form of it. And because executive functions were associated with so many outcomes and, you know, educational achievement but also mental health, researchers thought that if we exercised executive function with this type of games, then by repeatedly playing these games that tax your executive function, make it work hard, for example, remembering, you know, number of words, locations, objects in a gamified way to make it more engaging. Then we would improve executive function and then down the line we would improve arithmetic, academic outcome, mental health outcomes, et cetera. Unfortunately, meta-analysis of this type of research indicate that, for example, in the case of working memory, performance on the games themselves improve. Performance on other types, similar working memory tasks improves, too, and that's what we call near transfer, so you can improve working memory. But unfortunately, there is no what we call far transfer, so improving work memory doesn't lead to improvement in reasoning or maths. So this is very disappointing, but because that would have been great if kids are doing badly in maths because they've got poor work memory, we train this work memory using games, and then they do better in maths. And what it suggests is that the learning and the brain, the way the brain supports learning is in specific ways. So we learn about maths, maybe working memory for maths facts, manipulating numbers so we don't have these domain general working memory capacity that once we improve, it improves everything. So we're finding it's hard to generalise skills to other domains.

So, the brain is not just one big, powerful computer?

So, the brain is not just one big, powerful computer?

No, it has these specialised connections that support specific type of thinking.

No, it has these specialised connections that support specific type of thinking.

Can you say more about your own research work on learning games?

Can you say more about your own research work on learning games?

Yes, so we have colleagues at the Centre for Educational Neuroscience at the University of London in the UK. We were interested in trying a different approach because these games weren't working and it rested on two elements. So first, because general training did not help, we embedded our learning game within the specific context of maths and science to have this specificity. And second, in addition, to have some repeated practise, we engaged children's metacognition. And so meta cognition is our ability to think about our thoughts. It means that we can reflect on what we're doing and how we're doing it. So it's kind of thinking about thinking. If we're about to do a task that we think is going to be difficult, then we will engage more cognitive control, more executive functions to focus more. If we feel we haven't memorised our lesson well enough, we'll go over it again. So this is kind of this insight into our thoughts and behaviour. Or if we feel we're driving too fast and the road is slippery, we'll slow down. There is some evidence that if you prompt children to reflect on their performance, they'll engage executive functions in a more mature manner. A current hypothesis in the field of brain training and cognitive training is that if we incorporate metacognitive reflection in those training programs, kids will become more flexible in the way they're engaging executive function as a function of how hard the task is and that will lead to improvement in performance because they'll be able to reflect that, "This is hard. Now I need to think more. I can apply these tips and tricks that I've been practising." And it might also improve the far transfer so they might be able to apply their learning in a different context. So that's kind of the background. So our project focus on the fact that there are many concepts in science and maths that are counterintuitive. So as an example in science, dolphins. They're not fish, but they have fins and they live in the water, so they kind of look like fish. In maths, children learn that five is bigger than three, but then they learn negative numbers and minus five is now smaller than minus three. So they really have to kind of keep going over things that are a bit counter, what they've just learned before. So our intervention had two components. One was to make children aware of the fact that there are so many concepts in maths and science that are counterintuitive. Where the first response that comes to your mind is incorrect. So, for example, if I ask you what do cows drink?

Yes, so we have colleagues at the Centre for Educational Neuroscience at the University of London in the UK. We were interested in trying a different approach because these games weren't working and it rested on two elements. So first, because general training did not help, we embedded our learning game within the specific context of maths and science to have this specificity. And second, in addition, to have some repeated practise, we engaged children's metacognition. And so meta cognition is our ability to think about our thoughts. It means that we can reflect on what we're doing and how we're doing it. So it's kind of thinking about thinking. If we're about to do a task that we think is going to be difficult, then we will engage more cognitive control, more executive functions to focus more. If we feel we haven't memorised our lesson well enough, we'll go over it again. So this is kind of this insight into our thoughts and behaviour. Or if we feel we're driving too fast and the road is slippery, we'll slow down. There is some evidence that if you prompt children to reflect on their performance, they'll engage executive functions in a more mature manner. A current hypothesis in the field of brain training and cognitive training is that if we incorporate metacognitive reflection in those training programs, kids will become more flexible in the way they're engaging executive function as a function of how hard the task is and that will lead to improvement in performance because they'll be able to reflect that, "This is hard. Now I need to think more. I can apply these tips and tricks that I've been practising." And it might also improve the far transfer so they might be able to apply their learning in a different context. So that's kind of the background. So our project focus on the fact that there are many concepts in science and maths that are counterintuitive. So as an example in science, dolphins. They're not fish, but they have fins and they live in the water, so they kind of look like fish. In maths, children learn that five is bigger than three, but then they learn negative numbers and minus five is now smaller than minus three. So they really have to kind of keep going over things that are a bit counter, what they've just learned before. So our intervention had two components. One was to make children aware of the fact that there are so many concepts in maths and science that are counterintuitive. Where the first response that comes to your mind is incorrect. So, for example, if I ask you what do cows drink?

I want to say milk, but I thought I stopped and thought.

I want to say milk, but I thought I stopped and thought.

Exactly. So the second way was to encourage children to stop and think when they're solving maths and science problems, to give them time to inhibit their incorrect, intuitive response and favour the correct reasoning. So we called our intervention "stop and think" to really use a bit more time to think about the correct answer.

Exactly. So the second way was to encourage children to stop and think when they're solving maths and science problems, to give them time to inhibit their incorrect, intuitive response and favour the correct reasoning. So we called our intervention "stop and think" to really use a bit more time to think about the correct answer.

Good advice for life in general, I reckon. "Stop and think." So, did this approach work? Could you show far transfer?

Good advice for life in general, I reckon. "Stop and think." So, did this approach work? Could you show far transfer?

So first we were interested, whether we had any improvement in maths and science. So, this was run as a really large trial. What we call randomised control trial, in the UK in 7/8 year olds and 9/10 year olds. And it was the teacher was running the intervention. And what we found was that after 10 weeks training, there was improvement around two months of progress in science and one month in math. And these were assessed with standardised math and science test, not specifically the counterintuitive problems that we had covered in the training. So that suggested some near transfer to other types of maths and science problems. And we also found that the 9-to-10-year-olds were the ones who benefited the most. Maybe because they have better metacognition or better inhibitory control, and that enabled them to make the most of the training. In terms of far transfer, it was interesting, anecdotally, that some teachers reported that some children transferred to "stop and think" approach to other school subjects like reading. And I think that's quite interesting. And we don't know whether it's the intervention itself because it was metacognition or because it was the teacher doing the intervention. And so that was like within the whole class, they could kind of keep talking about it. And maybe the teacher could say, "Oh, look here, you should stop and think about your answer as well when you're, you know, reading comprehension, you're understanding that text. What's the question? You have to go back and find the answer." Again, the first thing comes to mind might not be the correct answer.

So first we were interested, whether we had any improvement in maths and science. So, this was run as a really large trial. What we call randomised control trial, in the UK in 7/8 year olds and 9/10 year olds. And it was the teacher was running the intervention. And what we found was that after 10 weeks training, there was improvement around two months of progress in science and one month in math. And these were assessed with standardised math and science test, not specifically the counterintuitive problems that we had covered in the training. So that suggested some near transfer to other types of maths and science problems. And we also found that the 9-to-10-year-olds were the ones who benefited the most. Maybe because they have better metacognition or better inhibitory control, and that enabled them to make the most of the training. In terms of far transfer, it was interesting, anecdotally, that some teachers reported that some children transferred to "stop and think" approach to other school subjects like reading. And I think that's quite interesting. And we don't know whether it's the intervention itself because it was metacognition or because it was the teacher doing the intervention. And so that was like within the whole class, they could kind of keep talking about it. And maybe the teacher could say, "Oh, look here, you should stop and think about your answer as well when you're, you know, reading comprehension, you're understanding that text. What's the question? You have to go back and find the answer." Again, the first thing comes to mind might not be the correct answer.

That's super encouraging then, and it's very impressive that a 2.5 month intervention can lead to an additional two month benefit. So very promising indeed. Do you think we will see mainstream education becoming increasingly gamified based on work like this or do you think cognitive training will be used more selectively? Primarily, let's say, for kids who are having particular problems with executive functions?

That's super encouraging then, and it's very impressive that a 2.5 month intervention can lead to an additional two month benefit. So very promising indeed. Do you think we will see mainstream education becoming increasingly gamified based on work like this or do you think cognitive training will be used more selectively? Primarily, let's say, for kids who are having particular problems with executive functions?

I think mainstream education is already quite gamified. So, for example, my son's primary schools, both previously in London and now in Melbourne. They had children use mathematics and English apps in the classroom, and then they also encourage their use at home. And so, rather than being domain general like the cognitive training we were talking about, these apps are specific to numeracy and literacy, so they would likely be more beneficial than the general apps I was talking about before. And one key advantage of this type of program going back to the issue of individual differences in children is that quite often like a lot of brain training games, they are what we call adaptive, so they get harder, the better you do. And so there's this concept in developmental psychology that's called the zone of proximal development, and the idea is that you learn most when you're doing something right at the level where it's quite difficult but you can still do it, some of it. If it's too easy, you don't learn. If it's too hard, you don't learn, either. You get quite frustrated, and you can't, you don't want to do it anymore. So if done well, this adaptive program so you know you don't want the progress to be too slow or too fast. It means that children can really practise at a sweet spot of difficulty for them and that would maximise their learning. So that's really an advantage in terms of having these apps instead of the whole class and the teacher is saying what's two times eight and some children know that very well and others don't. Then they can do that by themselves at the right level. However, I'm quite conflicted about these apps because of the lack of research carried out on them. So there are many different apps out there. Only a few of them have been designed by researchers and built on our cognitive psychology, cognitive neuroscience research, but also I'm conflicted because in general, you know there is a move to try and minimise screen time in children, and if we let them do this work on screen at school, and at home. And then it's really hard to say, Don't spend too much time on your screen because they're like, "Oh, well, I'm doing my maths." So I think we still need more evidence

I think mainstream education is already quite gamified. So, for example, my son's primary schools, both previously in London and now in Melbourne. They had children use mathematics and English apps in the classroom, and then they also encourage their use at home. And so, rather than being domain general like the cognitive training we were talking about, these apps are specific to numeracy and literacy, so they would likely be more beneficial than the general apps I was talking about before. And one key advantage of this type of program going back to the issue of individual differences in children is that quite often like a lot of brain training games, they are what we call adaptive, so they get harder, the better you do. And so there's this concept in developmental psychology that's called the zone of proximal development, and the idea is that you learn most when you're doing something right at the level where it's quite difficult but you can still do it, some of it. If it's too easy, you don't learn. If it's too hard, you don't learn, either. You get quite frustrated, and you can't, you don't want to do it anymore. So if done well, this adaptive program so you know you don't want the progress to be too slow or too fast. It means that children can really practise at a sweet spot of difficulty for them and that would maximise their learning. So that's really an advantage in terms of having these apps instead of the whole class and the teacher is saying what's two times eight and some children know that very well and others don't. Then they can do that by themselves at the right level. However, I'm quite conflicted about these apps because of the lack of research carried out on them. So there are many different apps out there. Only a few of them have been designed by researchers and built on our cognitive psychology, cognitive neuroscience research, but also I'm conflicted because in general, you know there is a move to try and minimise screen time in children, and if we let them do this work on screen at school, and at home. And then it's really hard to say, Don't spend too much time on your screen because they're like, "Oh, well, I'm doing my maths." So I think we still need more evidence

Beyond cognitive training, what other sorts of interventions can improve learning outcomes in schools? I know you've researched effects of physical exercise and mindfulness. What's the current state of evidence about that sort of intervention?

Beyond cognitive training, what other sorts of interventions can improve learning outcomes in schools? I know you've researched effects of physical exercise and mindfulness. What's the current state of evidence about that sort of intervention?

Yes, so basically, you can have a whole range of different ways to try and improve mental health, cognition. And mindfulness was another approach where educational practice went ahead of the research. In the UK, for example, a lot of schools started trying to implement mindfulness training. Um, when not, you know, any research had been done at the time. So, I've done myself very small-scale research on this trying to understand whether mindfulness meditation training may work in the same way in adolescents and in adults, and whether it might improve executive function, particular attentional control and resisting to emotional distractions. So this is because if you know, some of you might not have done mindfulness meditation before, but you might be told you need for five minutes to focus on your breath, and then your mind wanders because it always wanders. And then you have to bring it back to the breath, notice it and bring it back to the breath. So, you have to be able to control what you're tending towards. So, I was interested in this in the aspect of executive control training. What we found is that both adolescents and adults showed improvement in attentional control, and adolescents only also showed less brain activity in response to emotional distractions. So, we found some positive effects on these two measures, but they were small effect. And it's not the fact that, you know, everything improved. Interestingly, adolescents actually preferred a relaxation condition, which was a control condition because they felt that maybe had more immediate effects. So, this is very small scale. But in the UK, they run a very large trial called the Myriad Trial. And what they did was that secondary school teachers were trained to incorporate mindfulness meditation training in the social and emotional curriculum at the schools, and the key outcome measures they use were risk for depression, social, emotional and behavioural functioning and wellbeing. And so, whether you have kind of emotional problems, really, how well- more mental health focused maybe than what we did. And the results after two years showed no beneficial effect of the intervention compared to teaching as usual. And in fact, some of the secondary outcomes were worse after mindfulness training than teaching as usual. So this is really showing that training all secondary school children in one go, this kind of what we call universal intervention, and mindfulness is not the right approach. It might still be that some individual teenagers might still benefit, but not kind of the fact that we should do it for everything.

Yes, so basically, you can have a whole range of different ways to try and improve mental health, cognition. And mindfulness was another approach where educational practice went ahead of the research. In the UK, for example, a lot of schools started trying to implement mindfulness training. Um, when not, you know, any research had been done at the time. So, I've done myself very small-scale research on this trying to understand whether mindfulness meditation training may work in the same way in adolescents and in adults, and whether it might improve executive function, particular attentional control and resisting to emotional distractions. So this is because if you know, some of you might not have done mindfulness meditation before, but you might be told you need for five minutes to focus on your breath, and then your mind wanders because it always wanders. And then you have to bring it back to the breath, notice it and bring it back to the breath. So, you have to be able to control what you're tending towards. So, I was interested in this in the aspect of executive control training. What we found is that both adolescents and adults showed improvement in attentional control, and adolescents only also showed less brain activity in response to emotional distractions. So, we found some positive effects on these two measures, but they were small effect. And it's not the fact that, you know, everything improved. Interestingly, adolescents actually preferred a relaxation condition, which was a control condition because they felt that maybe had more immediate effects. So, this is very small scale. But in the UK, they run a very large trial called the Myriad Trial. And what they did was that secondary school teachers were trained to incorporate mindfulness meditation training in the social and emotional curriculum at the schools, and the key outcome measures they use were risk for depression, social, emotional and behavioural functioning and wellbeing. And so, whether you have kind of emotional problems, really, how well- more mental health focused maybe than what we did. And the results after two years showed no beneficial effect of the intervention compared to teaching as usual. And in fact, some of the secondary outcomes were worse after mindfulness training than teaching as usual. So this is really showing that training all secondary school children in one go, this kind of what we call universal intervention, and mindfulness is not the right approach. It might still be that some individual teenagers might still benefit, but not kind of the fact that we should do it for everything.

How about physical exercise?

How about physical exercise?

One of my former PhD students, Dr Fotini Vasilopoulos, was very interested in physical education and, you know, healthy body is also very important. We talk about healthy body, healthy mind, and many westernised society currently experience high obesity rates and including in childhood. And that's really a big issue. So there is interest in physical activity per se and also in whether physical activity might benefit not just the body but also cognition. So Fortini ran a meta-analysis of physical intervention in primary school children and what she found is that they were they had beneficial impacts. But again, there was some specificity. So, for example, what we found is that vigorous physical activity in aerobic physical activity. So you're kind of working quite hard, you kind of have to breathe harder, led to improvement in executive functions. While physical activity combined with academic instructions, for example, they have these activities when you ask the children to do three plus five and then they had to calculate it and then they have to make the corresponding number of jumping jacks. So, they have, like, some sport but they are also doing some maths at the same time. That benefited maths achievement. So, depending on what you might want to train, you might want to do a different type of intervention. However, the quality of the studies varied quite a lot, so, there's still low certainty of the evidence, low strength of this evidence.

One of my former PhD students, Dr Fotini Vasilopoulos, was very interested in physical education and, you know, healthy body is also very important. We talk about healthy body, healthy mind, and many westernised society currently experience high obesity rates and including in childhood. And that's really a big issue. So there is interest in physical activity per se and also in whether physical activity might benefit not just the body but also cognition. So Fortini ran a meta-analysis of physical intervention in primary school children and what she found is that they were they had beneficial impacts. But again, there was some specificity. So, for example, what we found is that vigorous physical activity in aerobic physical activity. So you're kind of working quite hard, you kind of have to breathe harder, led to improvement in executive functions. While physical activity combined with academic instructions, for example, they have these activities when you ask the children to do three plus five and then they had to calculate it and then they have to make the corresponding number of jumping jacks. So, they have, like, some sport but they are also doing some maths at the same time. That benefited maths achievement. So, depending on what you might want to train, you might want to do a different type of intervention. However, the quality of the studies varied quite a lot, so, there's still low certainty of the evidence, low strength of this evidence.

So impressive that you're looking at all these different dimensions even in your own work, not just as a field. So, looking ahead, where do you see the field of educational neuroscience heading? What do you think the next decade of research is going to lead towards?

So impressive that you're looking at all these different dimensions even in your own work, not just as a field. So, looking ahead, where do you see the field of educational neuroscience heading? What do you think the next decade of research is going to lead towards?

Well, educational neuroscience is still in its early days, really. So, if you think about how biological discoveries took decades, if not a century, to impact medical practise, then you know there's a long road ahead, so you can think- I think it's a good analogy to think about it that way. So progress, I think, will be made through continued and increased partnership between teachers and educational researchers, psychologists, cognitive neuroscientists. However, teachers have got very little spare time to do more training work or to work with teenage researchers, and that's really a limit. I think I'd love to work with more teachers and say, you know, what do you need? What's your problem? But having this two way street and working with teachers, they just don't have time. I'm involved in the society, called the International Mind, Brain and Education Society and trying to link up these different field of research and practise to try and improve our understanding and how we can apply it. So gradually we'll be building evidence for which educational practise works best and why so some of them may be existing educational practise, but we need- we want to understand "Why does this one work better than another one?" And ground that in our understanding of the learning brain.

Well, educational neuroscience is still in its early days, really. So, if you think about how biological discoveries took decades, if not a century, to impact medical practise, then you know there's a long road ahead, so you can think- I think it's a good analogy to think about it that way. So progress, I think, will be made through continued and increased partnership between teachers and educational researchers, psychologists, cognitive neuroscientists. However, teachers have got very little spare time to do more training work or to work with teenage researchers, and that's really a limit. I think I'd love to work with more teachers and say, you know, what do you need? What's your problem? But having this two way street and working with teachers, they just don't have time. I'm involved in the society, called the International Mind, Brain and Education Society and trying to link up these different field of research and practise to try and improve our understanding and how we can apply it. So gradually we'll be building evidence for which educational practise works best and why so some of them may be existing educational practise, but we need- we want to understand "Why does this one work better than another one?" And ground that in our understanding of the learning brain.

Such important work. Thanks so much for talking to us today, Iroise. And good luck with your work.

Such important work. Thanks so much for talking to us today, Iroise. And good luck with your work.

Thanks for having me.

Thanks for having me.

You've been listening to PsychTalks with me, Nick Haslam. We'd like to thank our guests for today. Professor Iroise Dumontheil. This episode was produced by Carly Godden with production assistance from Mairead Murray and Gemma Papprill. Our sound engineer was Jack Palmer. Thanks for tuning in to PsychTalks, and we still have more to come in this series. So, see you again soon. Bye for now.

You've been listening to PsychTalks with me, Nick Haslam. We'd like to thank our guests for today. Professor Iroise Dumontheil. This episode was produced by Carly Godden with production assistance from Mairead Murray and Gemma Papprill. Our sound engineer was Jack Palmer. Thanks for tuning in to PsychTalks, and we still have more to come in this series. So, see you again soon. Bye for now.