Innovation Science: Updates on Cognitive Training and University Innovation

Here are some news items that relate to a couple of recent posts of mine:

Not long ago I posted on the burgeoning use of games to improve one’s mental capabilities. Science Daily reports that Drs. Jimison and Pavel at the Oregon Health and Science University have correlated FreeCell playing ability with cognitive ability. They found that they could predict whether an aging individual has a cognitive impairment by comparing their FreeCell playing performance to the computer’s optimally-defined moves. The poorer the subject played, the more likely that they had developed memory problems that could lead to Alzheimers.

Pavel believes that as the elderly population increases…such home monitoring technology will become a health care standard. “In the near future, technology for unobtrusive monitoring, assessment and coaching will become a part of our everyday life…”

Part of the novelty of their approach was to alter the game so that it maintained the game’s difficulty at a constant level, keeping the game challenging regardless of the ability of the subject. The study only included nine subjects, so the conclusions are tentative to say the least. No mention was made about whether repeated playing of FreeCell could improve memory ability.

In an article related to my recent posts (here, here and here) on the relationship between universities and commercial innovations, this article by Peter Day from the BBC suggests that innovation does not come from universities except in the rare cases (those presumably including Stanford and MIT). British entrepreneur Stephen Allot is cited as saying that universities aren’t good at generating innovative ideas that can be commercialized into successful startups, and that the university’s role is to produce talented students who will create new ideas once they are exposed to market needs and commercial pressures.

Allot points to the fact that there is a large number of successful startups around Cambridge University yet the university has not benefited much from these successes, i.e., they have not been a direct part of their innovation. Cambridge University’s role in the creation of these companies has been to draw exceptionally talented students to Cambridge and to give them the skills to succeed once they graduate.

[Allot] calls this "people centred" innovation, linking PhD students with companies hungry for their insights with a network of involved corporate supporters of university labs….universities should not try to spot winners, but concentrate on what they are good at: attracting and improving really bright people who will go on to change the world with their innovations.