We had DDR (Dance Dance Revolution) years ago and my son Brad played it quite a lot. Intuitively, I knew this game was good for him. It works neuronetworks, the physical body, rhythm and visual processing (feedback is in visual form). I can't say we saw gains with DDR for Brad, but it was probably helpful.
Some people have seen some nice gains using one or more of these rhythmic processes. They are based on repetitive movements to a beat, like IM. But they are not IM, and shouldn't be considered the same, as good as, or a replacement for IM. They are different programs. Maybe in their own right beneficial, but I would not consider them IM.
What's different about IM. For one, the feedback. Huge difference. From observing DDR, I would guess that DDR gives positive feedback (you are right on) somewhere between 40 and 70 ms off the beat either direction, totaling 80 to 140 ms span of time where the response is deemed ‘accurate’. That's about the average error an adult would make in timing. IM measures down to 1/100 of a millisecond. In IM even between 9 ms and 10 ms, there is a difference in the visual and auditory feedback. 100 times more accurate - incomparably more accurate. IM is very precise. It works in brain time. 'Fine tunes' brain timing. IM also tells you whether you are early or late - a huge piece of information for everyone but especially so for the impulsive population. One can remain impulsive in these other games and still score perfectly. You can continually hit too fast and still be 'right on'. You would never know it because to you, it seems correct. Every part of your sensory processing says it right on, but it's not. See this post.
Another huge factor is that the IM feedback is given in an auditory form primarily, with the visual feedback added in a few years later. Auditory feedback seems to be a significant piece of the puzzle for many students, doubly so for those with auditory processing difficulties. Usually after the auditory processing is up to par, then we focus on the visual processing. Learning seems to take place faster in this sequence. Many IM providers sharing their knowledge and experience has resulted in the best practices forum where IM providers can log in an learn what works best for particular populations.
Another difference is the task. IM providers are continuously learning what tasks impact what mental processes. We are young in an explosion of knowledge here. For the best results in IM, you want a provider that can individualize the plan to your child’s individual needs. The choice of tasks they do makes a difference in outcomes. One of the things you are purchasing in the IM program is the expertise and knowledge of your IM provider. Providers are experienced in how to implement the program to meet various needs and how to be developmentally appropriate for each age group. Don't underestimate this skill. I once visited with a neurologist who's brain I was picking about hemispheric imbalances for children with Tourettes. He was a emmense source of information for me, used IM regularly and understood the program far better than I ever will. But at the end of our discussion he asked me, "how do you get these kids through the program?" Head knowledge is great, but it takes skill to implement it correctly. I don't often recommend the IM home unit for that very reason. Parents have to 'prove to me' they can do it.
One more difference is the length of time of FOCUS. The IM program notices when you begin to lose focus long before it becomes obvious to you. If you are clapping along, following a beat without any feedback and begin to think of something else.... you may, at some point, notice you are not hitting on the beat... but by then you are hundreds of milliseconds off the beat! Your focus has waned a significantly long time before the lack of focus came to your conscious attention. IM uses your conscious as well as subconscious attention to correct your focus. The very first second that you begin to lose focus you are told to correct it, to refocus. By the end of training, you are correcting loss of focus in just one second, and can stay that intensely focused for 20, 30 or even 40 minutes. During the task, you are focused, fully engaged, analyzing every single hit and correcting along the way. With out the quality precise feedback, it's simply impossible to achieve that level of focus and intense mental workout.
Are these other games potentially helpful? Absolutely, but they are not IM and shouldn't be considered the same, as good as, or a replacement for IM. They are different programs. Helpful - yes, IM - no.
