DEV Community: Yan Lunin

I’ve reworked the tutorial in my micro-project three times, and I still don’t know if it’s become any clearer.

Yan Lunin — Tue, 15 Sep 2026 15:09:32 +0000

I’m building a small N-Back trainer — an exercise for working memory and attention.

During a training session, a square appears in different positions on the screen while letters are spoken aloud. The user needs to follow two sequences at once. If the square’s current position matches its previous position, press one button. If the letter repeats, press the other. Sometimes both signals match, and sometimes neither does.

When you spend a long time developing a product like this, its interface starts to seem obvious. You know what every button does, where to look, and when to press it. That’s why your first encounter with a real user quickly brings you back down to earth.

Version one: they’ll figure it out as they go

Initially, the tutorial was a short demonstration session. It showed the basic mechanics of N-Back but barely explained the controls.

I expected people to see the interface and figure out what to do next. In practice, some users couldn’t even work out how to start a training session. Others started their first session, pressed the wrong buttons a few times, and left.

Some people closed the page while still going through the tutorial. I decided the problem was unclear rules. That may have been the case, but I couldn’t prove it: my analytics showed users leaving but didn’t explain why.

Version two: now I’ll explain absolutely everything

My next attempt was the “Academy” — a separate section with theory, examples, and explanations of the controls.

The logic seemed reasonable: first, people take their time learning the rules, then move on to practice already prepared. But it ended up taking too long. Users skimmed through the theory and often never reached the point where they could finally try the exercise themselves.

I tried to solve the problem of an unclear tutorial with even more tutorial content. I think this was about when I started suspecting I was heading in the wrong direction.

Version three: action first, explanation second

After that, I decided to drop the long introduction and run the tutorial directly on the actual playing field.

First, the app shows only the square and teaches users to notice when its position repeats. Then the square is temporarily disabled, and the user works with sound alone. After that, both types of signals are combined.

A hint doesn’t just tell you which button to press. The app presents a predefined sequence of signals, knows the correct answer at each step, and waits for the user to take the required action. This means people aren’t reading instructions separately from the interface — they immediately try following them in practice.

The first steps use 1-Back mode (easy level): each new signal only needs to be compared with the previous one. This is the simplest version of the exercise. Once the hints end, an independent test consisting of 5 signals begins. At this point, the interface no longer highlights anything: users must determine for themselves whether the square’s position, the sound, both signals, or neither has repeated.
I like this version more than the previous ones. It gets people to their first meaningful action faster. But “I like it” still doesn’t mean “users understand it better.”

I opened Metrica to check my assumptions

To evaluate the new tutorial, I opened Yandex Metrica and looked at two goals: “Tutorial started” and “Tutorial completed.”

Over the week of September 8–14, 57 visitors started the tutorial, and completion was recorded for 26. But these numbers still don’t answer my main question: did it become clearer to people?

The goals themselves are configured correctly. The first triggers when the tutorial starts. The second triggers when someone has gone through the hints and finished the independent five-signal test.

But there’s a problem: finishing the test doesn’t mean completing it correctly. As the goals are currently configured, even if a user gets almost everything wrong, Metrica will still record the tutorial as completed. It turns out I measured tutorial completion, not an understanding of the rules.

My takeaways and what I’ll do next

I won’t delete the existing goals. They show how many people started the tutorial and how many reached the end.

I’ll also create a multi-step goal that tracks the user’s journey in order:

Started the tutorial;
Reached the end of the independent test;
Started their first full training session;
Finished it.

This goal will only trigger if someone completes all the stages in the correct order within a single visit.

I’ll add a separate event for those who actually pass the test without hints. Right now, Metrica doesn’t distinguish between completing it correctly and simply reaching the last screen.

My main takeaway is a little obvious: first, you need to define exactly what counts as success, and only then configure your analytics. Regular goals show individual actions; a multi-step goal shows the entire user journey. But even a multi-step goal will only tell you that someone went through all the stages. To understand whether they grasped the rules, you need to define and track a separate metric.

Here is the current version of the tutorial. If you give it a try, please let me know: was there a moment when you didn't understand what to do next? And what exactly was confusing at that point?

Best Memory and Attention Trainers: I Compared 16 Services and Apps in 2026

Yan Lunin — Thu, 10 Sep 2026 13:50:48 +0000

How popular trainers work and which trainer is right for whom.

Data and features were checked as of September 8, 2026. The selection includes 16 services.

Who this overview is for and why it may be useful

This overview is for those who are choosing a trainer specifically designed to improve attention and memory (an N-Back trainer) for the first time, or who have already tried one app and want to find a more convenient one. I compared how easy it is to start training, how the app adjusts the difficulty, what it shows after a session, whether you can train on different devices, and what you have to pay for.

N-Back is simple in principle: signals appear on the screen one after another, and the user indicates when the current signal matches the one that appeared several steps earlier. In Dual N-Back, you have to track, for example, the position of a square and a sound at the same time. The higher the N, the longer the sequence you have to hold in memory.

The same N level can feel different in two apps. In one, signals appear faster; in another, matches occur more often; in a third, the session simply lasts longer. That is why comparing trainers only by the highest level reached is incorrect.

What exactly I counted

The number 16 does not mean that there are exactly 16 N-Back apps in the world. App stores contain many copies and programs that have not been updated for a long time. The overview includes 16 notable and available trainers.

Not every participant offers Dual N-Back specifically: Cogniba has only regular N-Back with one type of signal, while BrainScale combines several different exercises for memory and attention.

What is actually known about the effects of N-Back

Regular practice usually helps people perform the N-Back task itself better. However, there is still insufficient evidence that it noticeably increases general intelligence or improves memory in every real-life situation. Large research reviews find more reliable progress in similar exercises and a much smaller effect in tasks that are far removed from N-Back.

Practical conclusion: treat N-Back as a specific exercise for working memory and attention, not as a guaranteed way to raise IQ or treat ADHD. A good app should honestly show your progress instead of selling a bold promise.

If you are just getting acquainted with N-Back: take the mini-course on N-Back basics in DualNBackApp. It explains the two types of matches step by step and lets you move on to your first training session without having to study all the settings on your own.

How I compared the products

How easy it is to start: whether there is clear onboarding, ready-made settings, and a quick transition to the first training session.
How the difficulty changes: whether the app increases the load gradually and whether the session pace can be adjusted.
How clear the result is: whether the app shows missed matches, incorrect presses, reaction speed, and training history.
How convenient it is to train regularly: whether there are short sessions, plans, reminders, and a calm return after a missed day.
Where you can train: whether the trainer works in a browser, on a phone, and on a computer, and whether it preserves history across devices.
How much it costs: what is available for free and whether there are ads, a subscription, or a one-time purchase.

Install counts are not the same as the number of regular users, and reviews are more often written by the most satisfied or most dissatisfied people. That is why there is no single universal winner: a beginner, an experienced user, and someone who wants to train only on a phone will need different options.

16 trainers in simple terms

dualnbackapp.com — browser. Suitable for people who want to understand the rules for free and start training right away. It includes a mini-course, automatic load selection, a detailed error breakdown, and additional memory and attention tests. Training history transfers between devices, with a smooth increase in difficulty.
dualnback.com — browser and Android. A good choice for people who value a smooth increase in difficulty and a detailed explanation of results. It includes notes and a separate memory assessment. The main limitations are the subscription and the still-small audience.
Brain Workshop — Windows, macOS, and Linux. Suitable for experienced users who want free access and almost complete control over settings. The interface looks outdated, so it is difficult to understand without prior familiarity with N-Back.
BrainScale — browser. Suitable for people who want to alternate N-Back with other memory and attention exercises. It includes onboarding and consistency tracking, but Dual N-Back is only one of several exercises here, and the results are explained rather superficially.
Dual N-Back Ultimate — Android, iPhone, and Apple Watch. A strong option for experienced smartphone users: you can train from one to four signal types, change the appearance and language, and adjust many settings. Some features are paid, the interface may feel overloaded, and reviews include complaints about synchronization.
Dual N-Back Memory Training — Android. Suitable for people who want to train on a phone and let the app change the difficulty. It has more than 100,000 installs, goals, and a leaderboard. At the same time, it includes ads and purchases, while the explanation of results remains brief.
N-Back Challenge — Android and iPhone. Offers a ready-made 20-session program, reminders, and streak tracking. This is convenient for people who need a predefined plan. However, its advertising claims should be treated cautiously, and some restrictions may feel like punishment for missing a day.
NBacking — browser. Suitable for people who like experiments: the service lets you train up to four signal types simultaneously and offers unusual modes. It has no notable public audience, and the effectiveness of this particular service has not been studied separately.
Cogniba — browser. Stands out with a modern interface and a clear training history. It suits people who value simplicity, but it uses only one type of signal, and the subscription is noticeably more expensive than many alternatives.
dual-n-back.io — browser. The simplest option for a quick free trial without installation. It is easy to start, but there is little statistics, and transferring history between devices is currently listed only as a planned feature.
Dual N-Back by Andrew Tang — iPhone. Suitable for iPhone owners who want to keep data only on the device. You can repeat a session, change the pace, and view your history. There are still few additional features and public reviews.
Brainrot N back Memory Fix — iPhone, iPad, and Mac. Offers many modes, works offline, and synchronizes data through iCloud. A one-time purchase is available instead of a mandatory subscription. The product is new, and the developers have already had to fix synchronization errors.
BrainPulse Dual N-Back — iPhone. Suitable for people who need a quick start, automatic difficulty selection, and cloud storage. The app appeared recently, so it still has few reviews and little long-term usage history.
N-Back Brain Trainer — iPhone. A free mobile option with several modes and iCloud support. It is worth considering as a simple iPhone trainer, but the product is new and has not yet built a notable audience.
N-Back Evolution — Android. Familiar to long-time N-Back enthusiasts and includes the main training settings. Today, the interface looks less modern, and the app has a small active audience.
N-Back Trainer by Jesse Anderson — browser. Selects difficulty automatically, calculates results in detail, and lets you create a protected backup of your data. It is an interesting option for people who value statistics, but the service is still new and niche.

Important: install counts and reviews are only a snapshot as of the date of verification. They do not show how many people continue training after a month. Features and prices may also change.

Which products look the strongest

1. Almost equal in capabilities — dualnbackapp.com and dualnback.com

If we look at the entire user journey—from the first training session to the analysis of results—dualnbackapp.com and dualnback.com are closest to first place. Both help select the load, show errors in detail, and provide additional ways to assess working memory instead of limiting the result to a single N number.

dualnbackapp.com and dualnback.com have a comparable set of core capabilities. Both services work on different devices, synchronize training results, and adapt the difficulty to the user's progress, although the logic for moving between levels is implemented differently.

At the same time, dualnbackapp.com offers a mini-course on N-Back basics, a detailed error breakdown, training history, weekly summaries, and four additional memory and attention assessments. All features are available for free and without mandatory registration.

The main difference of dualnback.com is its additional tools for coaches: group management. At the same time, some of the service's advanced features are available only on a paid plan. For independent training, the services have similar capabilities, but dualnbackapp.com is completely free and lets you start training immediately, without creating an account.

2. For mobile training — Dual N-Back: Memory Training and N-Back Challenge

Both apps are suitable for people who prefer to train on a smartphone. Dual N-Back: Memory Training offers a classic training format and an easy start. N-Back Challenge includes a ready-made program, reminders, and streak tracking, but some features are limited to the paid version, and its claims about results should be treated critically.

3. The historical standard — Brain Workshop

Brain Workshop remains a classic option: it is free, lets you change almost every parameter, and, according to the project, has been downloaded more than 775,000 times since 2008. It suits people who like to configure training themselves on a computer, but the old interface may feel difficult for a beginner. In addition, it has no mobile version or synchronization between devices.

4. The most flexible mobile option — Dual N-Back Ultimate

Dual N-Back Ultimate lets you train from one to four signal types, change the appearance, and train in different languages. It is a strong choice for an experienced smartphone user. The downside is an overloaded interface, paid access to some capabilities, and individual complaints about synchronization.

Which trainer to choose

You want to start for free and without lengthy setup: choose dualnbackapp.com; the mini-course, training, and detailed results are available without payment.
You need the smoothest possible increase in difficulty and finished Android and iOS versions: dualnbackapp.com and dualnback.com are suitable. However, dualnback.com is the better choice if you are comfortable with a paid subscription.
You want to control almost every setting for free on a computer: choose Brain Workshop if you are ready to get used to the old interface and the lack of adaptive difficulty.
A large install count and smartphone training matter to you: look at Dual N-Back: Memory Training, but evaluate the ads and in-app purchases in advance.
You want to train three or four signal types simultaneously: compare Dual N-Back Ultimate and NBacking.
You need the simplest browser option: dual-n-back.io lets you start immediately without installation, but barely explains the results.

Conclusion

There is no single absolute winner in the N-Back market. In terms of their overall set of capabilities, dualnback.com and dualnbackapp.com are the closest to each other. At the same time, dualnback.com offers some advanced features on a paid basis, while dualnbackapp.com is completely free and stands out with a mini-course that is easy for beginners to understand.

Dual N-Back: Memory Training and N-Back Challenge are designed for smartphones. Brain Workshop remains the classic for people who like manual settings, while Dual N-Back Ultimate is one of the most flexible smartphone options.

The choice should not be based on the highest N number or on a promise to “make you smarter,” but on four questions: do you understand what to do; does the app explain your mistakes; do you want to return to training; and will the history be preserved on the devices you need? If a paid model does not put you off, dualnback.com is a suitable choice. If free access and clear onboarding matter, dualnbackapp.com looks like one of the most suitable options.

Multitasking Broke My Focus, So I Built a Free Offline-First Dual N-Back Trainer

Yan Lunin — Tue, 08 Sep 2026 18:45:04 +0000

AI made it possible for me to run more tasks in parallel, but I became worse at focusing on any one of them. Here is why the existing trainers did not work for me and what I decided to build myself.

If you want to see what I ended up with first, try my trainer.

How Multitasking Became a Problem

In my work, I constantly switch between different tasks and often work in multitasking mode. Strangely enough, AI tools have only made this problem worse for me: they allow me to run more processes in parallel, making it even harder to keep my attention on a single task.

Why Dual N-Back?

I began looking for exercises that could help me train my working memory and concentration. That is how I discovered Dual N-Back and started reading the research around it.

The results of these studies are mixed, so I did not treat the method as a magical way to increase intelligence. I simply wanted to find a regular and measurable exercise and test it through my own experience.

Why Existing Trainers Did Not Work for Me

I then explored the existing trainers. Each of them had interesting ideas, but none completely satisfied me. Some had interfaces I did not like, some used scoring systems that were difficult to understand, and others lacked adaptive difficulty, an offline mode, or the ability to train without creating an account.

In the end, I decided to build my own trainer:

Dual N-Back App trainer

Try the current version of Dual N-Back for free and without signing up.

What I Built and What Is Still Ahead

I combined the things that were personally important to me: a calm, modern interface, clear performance metrics, adaptive difficulty, a local training history, and the ability to use the trainer without mandatory registration.

The trainer is currently completely free, supports multiple languages, and its core features are available without an internet connection. Training results are stored locally on the device. I am also working separately on optional synchronization between devices.

I originally built this project for myself and expected almost nothing from it. That is why I was surprised when other people started using the trainer, and some began returning to their training sessions regularly. It is especially rewarding to see people continue practicing and gradually improve their results.

If you decide to try the trainer, I would be glad to receive your feedback. I am especially interested in whether the first-run experience is clear, whether the scoring system is easy to understand, whether the difficulty feels right, and what you think is missing.

I continue to actively develop the project and pay close attention to thoughtful suggestions.

Try the trainer for free without signing up and share your impressions →