Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 259 posts

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#151

Post by roywiggins »

coffeevradar wrote: post #101

I have less faith in public radio because my local station is always playing Lumosity adverts. I'm old enough to remember when the whole "sponsored by" thing being extended to full ads was a controversial development on US public radio. Now they're shilling outright scams and doing so with specific promises that are completely specious.

The ads are always quite careful to avoid promising anything outright. "brain training," "testing," "compare your score with global averages." Technically, Lumosity IS training your brain... to do better at Lumosity games.

It's obviously vaguely promising cognitive gains, but it manages to talk around it extremely well.

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#152

Post by threatofrain »

lettergram wrote: post #114
threatofrain wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's one thing to say that there are independent studies that demonstrate the validity of your interventions, but it's another to say that there is a current ecology of research and researchers that support your intervention. Can you make that stronger claim? Is there a review article that we can Google?

There is not at this time. However, as mentioned in another product we only have a prototype at this point. We are working with therapists and psychologists to bring the product further (essentislly using them for feedback). The goal being, at some point in the near future we get there. The challenege is doing that without a large financial backing. It just takes longer.

Thank you for your disclosure.

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#153

Post by tedmiston »

My perspective on Lumosity and its "science" is different because I was a paying customer.

I found Lumosity in 2009-2010 and played occasionally, eventually converting to a paid membership in 2012-2013 and playing weekly on desktop and iOS.

I was even quite proud to make it to the 98th percentile of all players [1]. (For reference, that's statistically consistent with my score on a standardized IQ test.)

Eventually something felt off about the scoring. At one point I distinctly recall them catching flack for changing the algorithm to boost you higher for playing more without necessarily playing better.

What I found anecdotally was that playing their games while I was in a distracted state would help me regain focus to the point where I could work on a cognitively challenging task, like a programming project, math problems, etc. afterward that I wouldn't have been able to before playing. I don't claim (or know) whether any longterm difference was made, but I also didn't join for that reason and never really cared about that. Lumosity games gave me a brain reset not dissimilar to a short meditation.

I don't know the science behind this idea, and perhaps it's purely placebo effect, but personally Lumosity was helpful to my life. That was my experience.

1: https://twitter.com/kicksopenminds/status/426760502128041984

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#154

Post by chris_wot »

lettergram wrote: post #139
EC1 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A different claim, same bullshit "science". " According to the CDC one in five Americans have ADHD, anxiety, or depression. Impacting productivity, focus, and mood. We can help, with ThinkSuite!" Chemicals can't even help me, how would ThinkSuite? If I could cure this crap with a site, I would, but we can't.

Actually, we respectfully disagree. The Lumonosity doesn't have any feedback to their systems, and are therefore WAY different than ours. We cannot claim it will solve your issues, but it could (stress the could) help. We accomplish this by providing neurofeedback[1]. [1] http://synaptitude.me/blog/neurofeedback-in-200-words/ Essentially, we can help cope with the issues by helping you identify bad practices. That's…

I have ADHD. I'm fully aware of my impulse control issues. Identifying bad practices is NOT treatment.

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#156

Post by meowface »

freehunter wrote: post #132
cant_kant wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a meta-analysis : " The 20 studies included here were all completed between 2008 and 2013....Sample sizes of treatment groups varied between 7 and 36 participants, and control groups between 8 and 43" "net effect of n-back training on Gf outcome measures, about the equivalent of 3–4 points on a standardized IQ test" ie: very small groups, tiny effect. Sounds dubious to me, like much research in the social "scien…

Considering the standard deviation for IQ is 15 points, I wouldn't drink an extra glass of water per day for another 3-4 IQ points, let alone play a training game for any extended amount of time. 3-4 points is statistically meaningless.

One standard deviation is fairly significant, though.

I think a lot of people would do mind training once per day for a possible 3-4 IQ increase, honestly. I would.

It's also possible that it only results in a fairly small general IQ increase, but a larger increase in some specific facet of recall or cognition.

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#157

Post by thaumasiotes »

freehunter wrote: post #132
cant_kant wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a meta-analysis : " The 20 studies included here were all completed between 2008 and 2013....Sample sizes of treatment groups varied between 7 and 36 participants, and control groups between 8 and 43" "net effect of n-back training on Gf outcome measures, about the equivalent of 3–4 points on a standardized IQ test" ie: very small groups, tiny effect. Sounds dubious to me, like much research in the social "scien…

Considering the standard deviation for IQ is 15 points, I wouldn't drink an extra glass of water per day for another 3-4 IQ points, let alone play a training game for any extended amount of time. 3-4 points is statistically meaningless.

0.2 standard deviations is a very large effect.

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#158

Post by bostonpete »

freehunter wrote: post #132
cant_kant wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a meta-analysis : " The 20 studies included here were all completed between 2008 and 2013....Sample sizes of treatment groups varied between 7 and 36 participants, and control groups between 8 and 43" "net effect of n-back training on Gf outcome measures, about the equivalent of 3–4 points on a standardized IQ test" ie: very small groups, tiny effect. Sounds dubious to me, like much research in the social "scien…

Considering the standard deviation for IQ is 15 points, I wouldn't drink an extra glass of water per day for another 3-4 IQ points, let alone play a training game for any extended amount of time. 3-4 points is statistically meaningless.

How can you claim a quarter of a std dev is statistically meaningless? Seems to me that's dependent on the confidence intervals involved not the standard deviation.

Re: Lumosity fined $2M for deceptive ads of “Brain Training” app

#160

Post by iaw »

knowaveragejoe wrote: post #98
w1ntermute wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gwern's done extensive research into this, and his meta-analysis has shown there's "a net gain (medium-sized) on the post-training IQ tests"[0, 1]. 0: http://www.gwern.net/DNB%20meta-analysis 1: http://www.gwern.net/DNB%20FAQ

Why is this downvoted? I was under the impression that Gwern did solid resarch and was well respected in the HN community.

Because JumpCrisscross's post [0] implies that w1ntermute cherry picked a component of the Gwern meta-analysis to prove his point while the next paragraph refuted it.

[0] : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10846443

Post reply on HN