Efficacy of memory training interventions targeting metacognition for older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Objectives

This review examined the evidence about training interventions targeting metacognition in improving memory and cognitive performance, metacognitive functioning, and well-being in healthy older adults.

Methods

Studies were identified in the PsycInfo, PubMed, and Scopus databases. The risk of bias was assessed using tools based on the Joanna Briggs criteria. The data were meta-analyzed using random effects models for those training targeting metacognition alone (metacognitive training) or combined with memory strategy training (strategic metacognitive training).

Results

Out of the 3,487 articles first identified, 25 studies were eligible for our review (N = 1,768 older adults; mean age range: 64–85 years). Metacognitive training and strategic metacognitive training elicited improvements in memory (d = 0.52 [95% CI: 0.19; 0.84], and d = 0.44 [95% CI: 0.29; 0.58], respectively), metacognitive beliefs (d = 0.58 [95% CI: 0.23; 0.93], and d = 48 [95% CI: 0.28; 0.69], respectively), strategy use (d = 0.98 [95% CI: 0.46; 1.49] and 0.87 [95% CI: 0.14; 1.61], respectively), and memory self-efficacy (d = 0.08 [95% CI: -0.39; 0.56] and 0.55 [95% CI: 0.36; 0.75], respectively). Strategic metacognitive training also improved well-being (d = 0.21 [95% CI: 0.07; 0.35]).

Conclusion

Interventions targeting metacognition (alone or combined with memory strategy training) have the potential to support older adults’ memory and metacognitive functioning. The methodological quality of most studies on the topic was often limited, however. Furthermore, well-designed studies needed to confirm the benefits of such interventions in older age.

Keywords:

• Memory intervention
• metacognitive training
• meta-analysis
• older adults
• systematic review

Acknowledgments

This work was carried out within the scope of the project “Use-inspired basic research”, for which the Department of General Psychology of the University of Padova has been recognized as “Dipartimento di Eccellenza” by the Ministry of University and Research.

Disclosure statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.