Most "brain training" claims rest on loose comparisons — this group did an app, that group did nothing, the app group did a little better. A 2022 trial run jointly by Columbia and Duke did something more rigorous: it put crossword puzzles head-to-head against computerized brain-training games, in a real randomized comparison.

What researchers did

Researchers recruited 107 participants (average age 71) who had been diagnosed with mild cognitive difficulty — noticeable, measurable changes in memory or thinking, though not severe enough to affect daily independence. Participants were randomly assigned to 12 weeks of either web-based crossword puzzle training or computerized cognitive game training, followed by periodic booster sessions tracked out to 78 weeks — over a year and a half.

What they found

On the trial's main memory measure, the crossword group showed greater improvement than the computer-game group, both at the 12-week mark and again at 78 weeks. The crossword group also showed benefits in daily functioning, and brain scans showed less measurable brain shrinkage in that group over the same period — a genuinely long follow-up window for this kind of trial to hold up over.

Why this is directly relevant here

This is close to the most direct evidence available for a specific choice Mind Vitality makes: leading with real crosswords and word-based puzzles rather than abstract computerized brain games. What the Research Actually Says About Brain Games covers the broader, more cautious evidence on cognitive training in general; this trial is a specific, direct data point in favor of the format this app leans on most.

What we won't claim

This was one trial, in a specific group of participants with diagnosed cognitive difficulty — it does not prove crosswords work identically for everyone, and it is not a treatment for any diagnosed condition. What it does show, in a real controlled comparison, is that the specific format matters, and crosswords held up well in the one rigorous head-to-head test available.