Affiliate disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases. This post contains affiliate links, which means we may earn a commission if you buy through them, at no extra cost to you.
Quick answer: Most brain training apps make you better at the games inside the app, but there is little good evidence that this carries over to everyday memory or protects you from dementia. The one notable exception is a specific “speed of processing” exercise from the ACTIVE trial: in a 2026 analysis, older adults who did it with follow-up booster sessions had a 25% lower rate of diagnosed dementia over 20 years, a promising result that has not yet been repeated in other trials.
So the honest answer is “mostly no, with one interesting exception.” This guide explains what the strongest studies found, why app scores rarely translate into real life, what to look for if you still want to use an app, and which habits have better evidence for protecting your thinking after 50.
Last reviewed: October 20, 2026. We compare published research and regulator documents; we have not tested these apps ourselves, and this article is general information, not medical advice.
What “brain training” actually means
“Brain training” covers a wide range of products. Most are app or web games that repeat one mental skill again and again: remembering a sequence, spotting a shape in a crowded screen, switching between rules, or doing quick arithmetic. Many adjust the difficulty as you improve, so the game always feels slightly hard.
Researchers separate two kinds of improvement. Near transfer means you get better at the trained task or something very similar. Far transfer means the gain spreads to different skills you did not practice, such as remembering where you parked, following a conversation in a busy restaurant, or managing your medications. Far transfer is what people actually want when they pay for a subscription, and it is exactly where the evidence is weakest.
What the strongest evidence says
The Cochrane review: small, short-lived gains
The Cochrane Collaboration, which produces some of the most careful summaries in medicine, reviewed computerized cognitive training lasting at least 12 weeks in cognitively healthy adults aged 65 and older. The 2020 update included 8 randomized trials with 1,183 participants, and the training lasted 12 to 26 weeks.
The findings were modest. Compared with an active control activity, training produced a small improvement in overall thinking scores right after the program ended, but the review found no evidence that the benefit was still there 12 months later. Most results were rated low or very low certainty. Just as important, none of the included trials measured quality of life or everyday activities with a validated tool, so the review could not say whether training made daily life any easier.
The 2016 expert review: practice makes perfect, but mostly at the game
In 2016 a team of psychologists led by Daniel Simons published a large review in Psychological Science in the Public Interest. They examined 132 papers that brain-training companies and their supporters had cited as proof. Their conclusion was that people reliably improve on the tasks they practice, but there was little evidence that the gains spread to other tasks or to real-world performance. They also noted that few studies measured real-world outcomes directly.
The FTC and Lumosity
Regulators have weighed in too. In January 2016 the U.S. Federal Trade Commission announced that Lumos Labs, maker of Lumosity, would pay $2 million to settle charges of deceptive advertising. The FTC alleged that the company did not have scientific support for claims that its games would improve performance at work or school and delay age-related decline, mild cognitive impairment, dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. A $50 million judgment was suspended because of the company’s financial condition. The settlement did not say brain games are harmful; it said the advertised benefits had not been shown.
The National Academies’ verdict
A 2017 report from the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine looked at what might prevent cognitive decline and dementia. It described the evidence for cognitive training as “encouraging although inconclusive,” placing it alongside blood pressure control and physical activity as the most promising areas, but said the evidence was not strong enough for a public campaign urging everyone to do it.
The exception: ACTIVE speed training
The study that keeps brain training in the conversation is ACTIVE (Advanced Cognitive Training for Independent and Vital Elderly). It is a randomized trial that began in 1998 and 1999 with about 2,800 community-dwelling adults aged 65 and older, funded by the National Institutes of Health.
Participants were assigned to one of four groups: memory training (strategies for remembering word lists and stories), reasoning training (spotting patterns to solve problems), speed of processing training, or a no-contact control group. Training was not an app at home. It was up to ten 60- to 75-minute sessions in small groups over 5 to 6 weeks. People who completed at least 8 of the 10 sessions could be randomly picked for booster sessions at 11 and 35 months, each round being up to four 75-minute sessions.
The speed training was a computer task focused on visual search: spotting and identifying information on a screen that flashed for shorter and shorter times, while also paying attention to something else. It became harder as the person improved.
What the 20-year follow-up found
In a paper published in 2026 in Alzheimer’s & Dementia: Translational Research & Clinical Interventions, Norma Coe and colleagues linked ACTIVE participants to their Medicare claims from 1999 to 2019. The analysis included 2,021 people who were in traditional Medicare at the start, about 73% of the original sample. Their average age at enrollment was 73.6, and 76% were women.
- People in the speed group who did booster sessions had a lower risk of a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease or a related dementia over 20 years (hazard ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 0.95). That is the source of the “25% lower risk” headlines.
- People in the speed group without boosters showed no reduction (hazard ratio 1.01).
- Memory and reasoning training showed no overall effect on dementia diagnoses.
Why this result needs careful reading
- It applies to one specific exercise done with a specific schedule, not to brain games in general. Memory and reasoning training in the same trial did not lower dementia diagnoses.
- The outcome is a diagnosis in billing records, not a direct test of everyone’s memory. The authors note that who gets diagnosed depends partly on access to care and on family members noticing changes.
- Some participants were left out. People enrolled in Medicare Advantage were excluded because their claims data are limited. The authors also acknowledge a possible selection bias after randomization.
- It has not been repeated yet. One trial, however long, is a starting point. The National Academies and Cochrane both call for more research on which kinds of training help and for whom.
- There is a commercial link. One author, Karlene Ball, discloses that she consults for and owns stock in Posit Science, the company that now markets the speed-training software (sold as part of BrainHQ). That does not make the result wrong. The trial was NIH funded and the analysis used independent Medicare data. But it is worth knowing when you see the company cite the study.
Why app scores rarely become real-life gains
When your score in a memory app climbs from week to week, three things are usually happening. You learn the rules and shortcuts of that particular game. You get more relaxed with the screen and the controls. And you practice the narrow skill the game measures. All three feel like your brain is getting sharper, but none of them guarantees you will remember a new neighbor’s name or where you left your glasses.
Real life is messy. Everyday memory depends on attention, sleep, mood, hearing, eyesight, stress and how much is competing for your focus at that moment. A game that isolates one skill under quiet, controlled conditions trains something much narrower. That is why researchers stress far transfer, and why most reviews find so little of it.
If you still want to use a brain training app
There is nothing wrong with brain games if you enjoy them. Here is how to keep your expectations and your money in check.
Good reasons to use one
- You enjoy it, and it replaces passive screen time.
- You like tracking your own progress on a specific skill.
- You want to try a speed-of-processing style exercise and understand the evidence is promising but not settled.
Skip it, or think twice, if
- You are hoping it will fix memory problems that are already affecting your daily life. That calls for a medical check first (see below).
- It takes time away from exercise, sleep or seeing people, which have broader evidence behind them.
- The app promises to “prevent Alzheimer’s,” “reverse brain aging” or make you a certain number of years younger. Those are the kinds of claims the FTC has challenged.
- The subscription renews automatically and you are not sure you will use it. Check how to cancel before you sign up.
Questions to ask about any app’s claims
- Was the app itself tested in a randomized trial, or does it borrow results from a different program?
- Did the study measure everyday function, or only scores on similar games?
- Were the participants like you (age, health), and how long did the benefit last?
- Who paid for the study, and do the researchers have a financial stake?
What has better evidence for keeping your mind sharp
The 2024 Lancet Commission on dementia identified 14 modifiable risk factors, including high blood pressure, physical inactivity, hearing loss, untreated vision loss, high LDL cholesterol in midlife, diabetes, smoking, heavy drinking, depression and social isolation. It estimated that about 45% of dementia cases could, in theory, be prevented or delayed if all of these were addressed across the population. That is a population estimate, not a promise to any one person, but it shows where the bigger levers are.
Trials that combine several habits look more encouraging than single games. The Finnish FINGER trial (2015, The Lancet) gave at-risk adults aged 60 to 77 a two-year program of diet advice, exercise, cognitive training and heart-risk monitoring, and found better overall thinking scores than in a group given general health advice. In the U.S. POINTER trial (2025, JAMA), 2,111 older adults at risk of decline followed either a structured or a self-guided lifestyle program for two years. Cognition improved in both groups, a little more in the structured one.
Practical steps with broader support include:
- Move most days. Aerobic activity and strength work help the heart and blood vessels that supply the brain. See our guide to simple daily habits that support memory.
- Get your hearing checked. Hearing loss is one of the largest single risk factors in the Lancet report. Our article on hearing loss and dementia explains why.
- Know your blood pressure and cholesterol numbers and treat them if your clinician recommends it.
- Stay socially and mentally engaged in ways you enjoy: learning a language or instrument, volunteering, card games with friends, or puzzles. If you like paper puzzles, large-print crossword books are an easy way to unplug.
- Protect your sleep. Poor sleep makes memory feel worse in the short term, whatever its long-term role.
For a broader look at what changes with age and what does not, read our complete guide to age and memory and 8 habits that support memory and focus.
When to see a doctor instead of downloading an app
Brain games are not a test or a treatment for memory problems. Talk to your doctor if you or people close to you notice changes like these:
- Memory lapses that are getting worse or are affecting work, bills, medications or driving.
- Getting lost in familiar places, or repeating the same questions within a short time.
- Trouble following conversations, finding common words, or managing tasks you used to do easily.
- Changes in mood, personality or judgment that others comment on.
Many causes of memory trouble are treatable, including vitamin B12 deficiency, thyroid problems, medication side effects, depression, sleep apnea and hearing loss. Our guide to memory loss vs normal aging: 5 red flags can help you decide what to raise at your next appointment.
The bottom line
If you enjoy brain training apps, use them for fun, not as a medical strategy. Your scores will rise, but the evidence that this changes everyday memory or dementia risk is weak for most products. The ACTIVE speed-training result is the most interesting exception and is worth watching, but it is one trial of one supervised program with boosters, and it needs to be repeated. The habits with the broadest support are less exciting: move your body, look after your blood pressure, hearing and sleep, and stay connected to other people.
Sources
- Coe NB, Miller KEM, et al. Impact of cognitive training on claims-based diagnosed dementia over 20 years: evidence from the ACTIVE study. Alzheimer’s & Dementia: TRCI. 2026;12:e70197. doi.org/10.1002/trc2.70197
- University of Alabama at Birmingham news release on the 20-year ACTIVE results (2026). uab.edu
- Gates NJ, et al. Computerised cognitive training for 12 or more weeks for maintaining cognitive function in cognitively healthy people in late life. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2020, CD012277.pub3. PMC7045394
- Simons DJ, et al. Do “brain-training” programs work? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 2016 (summary by the Association for Psychological Science). psychologicalscience.org
- Federal Trade Commission. Lumosity to pay $2 million to settle FTC deceptive advertising charges (January 5, 2016). ftc.gov
- National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Preventing Cognitive Decline and Dementia: A Way Forward (2017). nationalacademies.org
- Livingston G, et al. Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2024 report of the Lancet standing Commission. The Lancet, 2024 (summary by Alzheimer Europe). alzheimer-europe.org
- Ngandu T, et al. A 2-year multidomain intervention to prevent cognitive decline in at-risk elderly people (FINGER). The Lancet, 2015. PubMed 25771249
- Baker LD, et al. Structured vs self-guided multidomain lifestyle interventions for global cognitive function: the US POINTER randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 2025 (Alzheimer’s Association results page). alz.org
Sources checked: October 2026.
Frequently asked questions
Do brain training apps actually work for older adults?
Mostly for the games themselves. A 2020 Cochrane review of 8 trials in healthy adults 65 and older found small, short-term gains in thinking scores, with no evidence they lasted 12 months, and low certainty overall. Little evidence shows gains carry over to everyday memory.
Can brain games prevent dementia?
Not in general. One exception is the ACTIVE trial’s speed-of-processing training: people who also did booster sessions had a lower rate of diagnosed dementia over 20 years (hazard ratio 0.75). Memory and reasoning training in the same trial did not, and the result has not yet been repeated.
Is BrainHQ the same as the training used in the ACTIVE study?
The company that sells BrainHQ, Posit Science, markets speed-of-processing software that grew out of the training used in ACTIVE. In the trial, though, training was delivered in supervised small-group sessions with boosters, so results from home app use may differ.
Why did the FTC fine Lumosity?
In 2016 the FTC said Lumos Labs lacked scientific support for claims that Lumosity would improve work and school performance and delay cognitive decline and dementia. The company agreed to pay $2 million, with a $50 million judgment suspended.
What works better than brain training for memory after 50?
Broader habits have stronger support: regular physical activity, controlling blood pressure and cholesterol, treating hearing and vision loss, good sleep and staying socially active. The 2024 Lancet Commission estimated about 45% of dementia could in theory be prevented or delayed by addressing 14 risk factors.