Imagine Your Brain Firing on All Cylinders
The Short Story
The Maximum Mind studies indicate that Maximum Mind improves reasoning and creative problem-solving, episodic memory, verbal ability, concentration, planning skills, visual representation, and the acquisition and retention of new knowledge.
Marco’s Grounds offered free cognitive assessments with purchases of Maximum Mind for a limited time throughout 2019, 2020, and 2021 to assess the effect of Maximum Mind on customers willing to test and record themselves.
Marco’s Grounds offered those assessments in partnership with the CBS Health platform powered by Cambridge Brain Sciences (CBS)—a world-leading provider of cognitive testing tools—to help customers receive quantitative science-backed feedback on their current brain health and processing power.
The Maximum Mind Effect
Below the aggregate results of controlled trials to investigate the effect of Maximum Mind on memory, focus, learning, and creativity. Percentages increase over time, compared to baseline, 147 participants.
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
The Studies
In the studies, customers were self-selected and offered free AI powered cognitive testing with the purchase of Marco’s Grounds Flagship Pharmaceutical Grade Cognitive and Mind Enhancing Complex Maximum Mind.
Participants were asked to perform the testing three times: before starting on Maximum Mind, after 4 weeks of Maximum Mind, and the final test after 16 weeks of using Maximum Mind.
The results for the 147 eligible subjects revealed meaningful improvement in core cognitive areas such as:
- reasoning and verbal ability (see figure Reasoning),*
- concentration (see figure Focus)*
- problem-solving skills (see graph Creativity)*
- memory recall and recall speed (see graph Memory)*
- and acquisition and retention of new knowledge (see figure Learning)*
- visual representation (see figure Spatial Mastery)*
- 37.2% increase in scores for planning skills,*
- 14.4% increase in scores to measure the ability to concentrate/avoid distraction,*
- 16.9% increase in scores for verbal reasoning,*
- 31.1% increase in scores for visual representation,*
- 9.8% increase in scores for episodic memory, and*
- 8.7% increase in scores for verbal short-term memory.*
While these results are findings on a small number of people, they are exciting initial results to see.
The Long Story
The Cambridge Brain Sciences cognitive tasks are based on classical paradigms from cognitive psychology literature. Cambridge Brain Sciences is a leading online (computer-based) brain health assessment platform with powerful AI tools.
Their assessments of brain function and brain health have been taken millions of times and used in over 300 studies published in leading academic journals over the last 25 years.
Cambridge Brain Sciences is headquartered in Toronto, Canada, and has helped hundreds of thousands of people from 75+ countries gain greater insight into their brain health every day. Visit http://www.cambridgebrainsciences.com to learn more.
Below a description of the tests the participants of the Maximum Mind Studies went through.
Grammatical Reasoning Task
Based on Alan Baddeley’s three-minute grammatical reasoning test (Baddeley, 1968). Short sentences describing the relationship of two shapes and an image of the shapes are displayed on the screen. Participants must indicate whether the sentence correctly describes the pair of objects displayed on the screen. Participants have 90 seconds to solve as many problems as possible. The primary outcome measure is the number of problems solved correctly, minus the number of problems answered incorrectly.
Rotations Task
They are often used for measuring the ability to manipulate objects spatially in the mind (Silverman et al., 2000). Two grids of colored squared are displayed to either side of the screen, with one of the grids rotated by a multiple of 90 degrees. When rotated, the grids are either identical or differ by the position of just one square. Participants must indicate whether or not the grids are identical. Participants have 90 seconds to solve as many problems as possible. The primary outcome measure is the overall score – the sum of the difficulties of all successfully answered problems, minus the sum of the difficulties of all incorrectly answered problems.
Spatial Span Task
A variant on the Corsi Block Tapping Task (Corsi, 1972) is used to measure spatial short-term memory capacity. 16 squares are displayed in a 4 x 4 grid. A sub-set of the squares will flash in a random sequence at a rate of 1 flash every 900 ms. Subsequently, participants must repeat the sequence by clicking on the squares in the same order they flashed. Difficulty is increased or decreased by one box depending on whether the participant got the previous trial correct. After three errors, the task will end. Outcome measures are (i) maximum level completed (e.g., the problem with the highest number of targets that the user successfully completed) and (ii) average score: the sum of the number of targets in all successfully solved problems, divided by the number of successfully completed problems.
Monkey Ladder Task
A variant on a task from the non-human primate literature (Inoue & Matsuzawa, 2007). Sets of numbered squares are displayed on the screen at random locations. After a variable interval of time, the numbers disappear, leaving just the blank squares, and participants must respond by clicking the squares in ascending numerical sequence. Difficulty is increased or decreased by one numbered box depending on whether the participant got the previous trial correct. After three errors, the task ends. Outcome measures are (i) maximum level completed (e.g., the problem with the highest number of boxes that the user successfully completed) and (ii) average score: the sum of the number of boxes in all successfully solved problems, divided by the number of successfully completed problems.
Token Search Task
Based on a test that is used to measure strategy during search behaviors (Collins et al., 1998). Boxes are displayed in random locations. Participants must find a hidden “token” by clicking on the boxes one at a time. When the token is found, it is hidden within another box. The token will not appear within the same box twice. Thus, participants must search the boxes until the token has been found once in each box. If they search the same empty box twice or search a box in which the token has previously been found, this is an error, and the trial ends. Difficulty is increased or decreased by one box depending on whether the participant got the previous trial correct. After three errors, the task will end. Outcome measure is the maximum level completed (e.g., the problem with the most tokens that the user successfully completed).
Spatial Planning Task
A direct descendant of the “Tower of London” task, Spatial Planning is a classic neuropsychological test of planning (Shallice, 1982). When the test begins, numbered beads are positioned on a tree-shaped frame. Participants must reposition the beads, so they are configured in ascending numerical order, in as few moves as possible. Problems become progressively harder, and participants have three minutes to solve as many as possible. The primary outcome measure is the overall score, calculated by subtracting the number of moves made from twice the minimum number of moves required.
Double Trouble Task
A variant on the verbal working memory component of the WAIS-R intelligent test (Weschler, 1981). A sequence of numbers will appear on the screen one after another. Once the sequence is complete, participants must repeat the sequence. Difficulty is increased or decreased by one number depending on whether the participant got the previous trial correct. After three errors, the task ends. The primary outcome measure is the maximum level (i.e., the problem with the highest number of digits) that the player successfully completed.
Paired Associates Task
A variant on a paradigm that is commonly used to assess memory impairments in aging clinical populations (Gould et al., 2005). Boxes are displayed at random locations on the screen. The boxes are opened one after another to reveal an enclosed object. Subsequently, the objects are displayed in random order in the center of the screen, and participants must determine which box contains the presented object. Difficulty is increased or decreased by one box depending on whether the participant got the previous trial correct. After three errors, the task will end. Outcome measures are (i) maximum level completed (e.g., the problem with the most boxes that the user successfully completed) and (ii) Average score: the sum of the number of boxes in all successfully solved problems, divided by the number of successfully completed problems.
Odd One out Task
Based on a sub-set of problems from the Cattell Culture Fair Intelligence Test (Cattell, 1949). Nine patterns will appear on the screen. The features that make up the patterns are color, shape, and number and are related to each other according to a set of rules. Participants must deduce the rules related to the object features and select the pattern that does not correspond to those rules. Difficulty is increased or decreased depending on whether the participant got the previous trial correct. Participants have 3 minutes to solve as many problems as possible. The primary outcome measure is the number of correctly answered problems, minus the number of incorrectly answered problems.
Digital Span Task
A variant on the verbal working memory component of the WAIS-R intelligent test (Weschler, 1981). A sequence of numbers will appear on the screen one after another. Once the sequence is complete, participants must repeat the sequence. Difficulty is increased or decreased by one number depending on whether the participant got the previous trial correct. After three errors, the task ends. The primary outcome measure is the maximum level (i.e., the problem with the highest number of digits) that the player successfully completed.
Feature Match Task
Based on classical features, search tasks have been used to measure attentional processing (Treisman & Gelade, 1980). Two grids are displayed on the screen, each containing an array of abstract shapes; in half of the trials, the grids differ by just one shape. Participants must indicate whether or not the grid’s contents are identical. Difficulty is increased or decreased by one shape depending on whether the participant got the previous trial correct. Participants have 90 seconds to solve as many problems as possible. The primary outcome measure is the overall score – the sum of the difficulties of all successfully answered problems, minus the sum of the difficulties of all incorrectly answered problems.
Polygons Task
Based on the Interlocking Pentagons Task, which is often used to assess age-related disorders (Folstein et al., 1975). A pair of overlapping polygons is displayed on one side of the screen. Participants must indicate whether a polygon displayed on the other side of the screen is identical to one of the interlocking polygons. Difficulty is increased by making the differences between the polygons more subtle or decreased by making the differences between the polygons more pronounced. Participants have 90 seconds to solve as many problems as possible. The primary outcome measure is the overall score – the sum of the difficulties of all successfully answered problems, minus the sum of the difficulties of all incorrectly answered.
How to Participate
Note: At the time being we are not taking new participants.
Literature
- Baddeley, A. D. (1968). A 3 min reasoning test based on grammatical transformation. Psychonomic Science, 10(10), 341–342.
- Cattell, R. B. (1949). Culture free intelligence test, scale 1, handbook. Champaign, IL: Institute of Personality and Abilit.
- Collins, P., Roberts, A. C., Dias, R., Everitt, B. J., & Robbins, T. W. (1998). Perseveration and strategy in a novel spatial self-ordered sequencing task for nonhuman primates: effects of excitotoxic lesions and dopamine depletions of the prefrontal cortex. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 10(3), 332-354.
- Corsi, P. (1972). Memory and the medial temporal region of the brain. Unpublished doctoral dissertation), McGill University, Montreal, QB
- Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975). “Mini-mental state.” A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12(3), 189–198.
- Gould, R. L., Brown, R. G., Owen, A. M., Bullmore, E. T., & Howard, R. J. (2006). Task-induced deactivations during successful paired associates learning: an effect of age but not Alzheimer’s disease. Neuroimage, 31(2), 818–831.
- Inoue, S., & Matsuzawa, T. (2007). Working memory of numerals in chimpanzees. Current Biology, 17(23), R1004-R1005.
- Shallice, T. (1982). Specific Impairments of Planning. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 298(1089), 199–209.
- Silverman, I., Choi, J., Mackewn, A., Fisher, M., Moro, J., & Olshansky, E. (2000). Evolved mechanisms underlying wayfinding: Further studies on the hunter-gatherer theory of spatial sex differences. Evolution and Human Behavior, 21(3), 201-213.
- Stroop, J. R. (1992). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121(1), 15.
- Treisman, Anne M., and Garry Gelade. “A feature-integration theory of attention.” Cognitive psychology 12, no. 1 (1980): 97-136.
- Wechsler, D. (1981). The psychometric tradition: developing the Wechsler adult intelligence scale. Contemporary Educational Psychology.
Notes
*The studies do account for the test taker learning effect, i.e., the increase in score over time imputable to the mere repetition of the test. However, since the participants have not been selected randomly, the Maximum Mind studies are to be understood as aggregated case studies.
