## 4 Discussion
### CCT and Cognitive Functioning  
Findings from this study are comparable to those reported by [PERSON] et al. [40], which showed that employees improved in executive functioning after CCT. They are also partially aligned with [PERSON] [38], who reported improvements in task switching among manufacturing workers engaged in repetitive tasks. Additionally, our study's findings are consistent with [PERSON] [44], which reported improved executive functioning in healthy older adults after CCT during a 14-day bed rest period. It is exciting to see improvement in VF-L in middle-aged employees after CCT. However, an intriguing question arises from this finding: can this improvement be considered a near or far transfer from two perspectives: (i) the task utilized in CCT, and (ii) the neurocognitive instrument used to evaluate executive functioning? Specifically, CCT with virtual maze navigation is not based on any specific cognitive function but is rather task-based, encompassing a variety of cognitive functions, primarily working memory and executive functioning, for proper maze navigation. One can argue that maze navigation engages multiple cognitive functions, including attention, working memory, decision-making, and  
Figure 5: Scatter plot for the self-evaluated cognitive change scores and health status for the control group. executive functioning. This statement is supported by studies showing strong correlations between spatial navigation performance, both in-person and online in virtual reality, with spatial memory [69], episodic memory [70], and executive functioning [71; 72]. Thus, adopting the notion that near transfer encompasses the same construct in the training task and the cognitive test [73], the improved performance on VF-L can be, or should be, considered near transfer. The claim that improved performance on VF-L shows near transfer must also consider the similarity of the task and test instrument in terms of their delivery and testing modality. Somewhat surprisingly, the greatest effect of the virtual maze navigation training, a purely visuospatial task, occurred on the VF-L test, which is a purely verbal test measuring working memory and executive functioning. Our previous study with virtual maze navigation CCT [74] also showed an increase in executive functioning, but it was measured with the TMT-B test, which is also primarily a visuospatial task. Therefore, our finding of significantly increased performance on VF-L could also be considered far transfer. Another intriguing finding in our study is the difference between the two verbal fluency tasks, VF-L and VF-S. After CCT we observed the transfer in VF-L but not VF-S. Despite their traditional wide adoption in clinical and diagnostic practice, there is ongoing scientific discussion regarding the relationship between semantic and letter verbal fluency tasks and what brain functions underlie their performance. In the VF-S task, the constraint is that all produced words should belong to one semantic category (e.g., animals). In the VF-L task, the constraint is that all produced words should start with one letter (e.g., S). In general, verbal fluency tasks engage multiple neurocognitive functions, including executive functions, memory, and language components. The difference between the two tasks is often explained by the fact that in VF-S, one can follow associations for word production, whereas in VF-L, associations must also be monitored for their phonemic fit, which places additional executive function demands. In this study, the significant finding in letter fluency may further emphasize the role of executive functioning. In this study, it is also noticeable that there is a lack of transfer (i.e., improved performance) in memory testing with AVLT and in the speed of processing as measured by the Coding and Comparison tests. In the AVLT Delayed Recall and Coding tests, we observed significant improvements in both the intervention and control groups.