Brain-training puzzle games can help you get better at the games you practice, and some studies in older adults report gains on specific cognitive tests. But stronger claims—that these games reliably improve everyday thinking or prevent dementia—are not established. The key distinction is between improving at a trained or similar task and transferring that improvement to different skills or daily life.
What does “good for your brain” mean?
A higher score on a puzzle or app is evidence that you improved at that game. It does not, by itself, show that your memory, judgment, or everyday independence improved.
Near transfer: improvement on a practiced or similar task
Near transfer is a gain on the trained game or a task that uses similar skills. For example, practicing a speed-focused game may improve performance on another speed-focused test. This is a meaningful but limited result.
Far transfer: improvement in different skills or daily life
Far transfer means gains on substantially different abilities or everyday functioning. A laboratory test of a selected skill is not the same as evidence that a person handles daily tasks better, avoids cognitive decline, or prevents dementia.
#1 Best Overall
- 399 Games Puzzles Trivia Challenges Specially Designed to Keep Your Brain Young By Linde Nancy
What studies have found
Reviews reach different conclusions partly because they examine different programs, participants, comparison groups, and outcomes. Some find gains in particular test domains; evidence for broad transfer is less convincing.
| Review | Participants and scope | Reported findings | What the result does not establish |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 systematic review and meta-analysis | 43 studies, 2,636 participants; commercially available programs studied in healthy older adults and older adults with mild cognitive impairment. | Small near-transfer effects were reported. For the mild cognitive impairment sample, the review found no far-transfer effect. | The authors said evidence was insufficient to support improvement in memory, general cognition, or everyday functioning. |
| Wang and colleagues, 2021 | 15 trials, 759 community-dwelling older adults; game-based brain training compared with control groups. | Reported effects were processing speed g = 0.23, selective attention g = 0.40, and short-term memory g = 0.35. | The authors described training as a supplementary intervention and called for larger, well-designed trials; the results do not show broad everyday improvement. |
| 2020 Scientific Reports meta-analysis | 16 studies, 1,543 healthy adults older than 60; commercial computerized cognitive games. | Reported statistically significant changes in processing speed (SMD 0.40, 95% CI 0.20–0.60), working memory (0.21, 95% CI 0.08–0.34), executive function (0.21, 95% CI 0.06–0.35), and verbal memory (0.12, 95% CI 0.01–0.24). Attention and visuospatial ability did not show significant changes. | The authors noted limitations in blinding and intention-to-treat analysis and said there were too few studies to determine whether the games prevent clinical dementia. |
These findings should not be collapsed into either “brain games do nothing” or “brain games make you smarter.” The reviews test different interventions and populations, and their measured outcomes range from trained-task performance to specific cognitive tests. Statistically significant change in one domain is not proof of broad improvement.
Do brain games prevent dementia or Alzheimer’s disease?
The evidence summarized here does not establish that brain-training puzzle games prevent dementia or Alzheimer’s disease. The 2020 meta-analysis specifically reported that there were not enough studies to determine whether commercial computerized games prevent clinical dementia. Improvement on a game or a selected cognitive test should not be presented as proof that a person has prevented decline.
What should you look for in a game or app?
There is no single product comparison supported by these findings. When evaluating a puzzle game or app, separate what it trains from what its marketing promises:
Rank #3
- Exact skill: Is the game designed around speed, attention, memory, logic, or another ability?
- Evidence match: Did a study test this specific game, or a different program with related exercises?
- Outcome measured: Was the result a better game score, a similar cognitive test, or a change in daily functioning?
- Population: Were participants healthy older adults, older adults with mild cognitive impairment, or another group? Most evidence summarized here concerns older adults, so it should not automatically be generalized to children, younger adults, every puzzle genre, or people receiving clinical care.
- Practical fit: Consider time, cost, accessibility, and whether you enjoy the format. A game you will actually want to play may be a better entertainment choice than one that makes unsupported promises.
One 2014 randomized study used 20 one-hour sessions of non-action video games selected from Lumosity and reported improvement on certain cognitive measures in its healthy older-adult training group. That was one specific intervention; it does not establish broad everyday benefit or show that every Lumosity game has the same effect.
In a subgroup analysis of older-adult studies, non-time-pressure or supported formats were preferred. That finding is not a universal prescription, and it does not identify a best app or an optimal training schedule.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Is it still worth playing puzzles?
Yes, if you enjoy the challenge. Puzzles can be a worthwhile form of entertainment without requiring a promise of measurable cognitive-health benefits. A paper puzzle book or an app may both suit that purpose; the studies summarized here do not test any particular book or show that buying one prevents dementia.
The authors of the 2021 systematic review and meta-analysis put the evidence boundary this way: “Thus, whilst ‘brain training’ may be suitable for enjoyment and entertainment purposes, there is currently insufficient empirical evidence to support that such training can improve memory, general cognition, or everyday functioning.”
Wang and colleagues’ 2021 review described game-based brain training as a supplementary intervention for improving cognitive functions in community-dwelling older adults. That conclusion concerns the specific outcomes assessed in their review, not a guarantee of results for an individual player.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
