The complexities of complex span: Explaining individual differences in working memory in children and adults.

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Two studies are presented that investigated the constraints underlying working memory performance in children and adults. In each case, independent measures of processing efficiency and storage capacity are assessed to determine their relative importance in predicting performance on complex span tasks,which measure working memory capacity. Results show that complex span performance was independently constrained by individual differences in domain-general processing efficiency and domain-specific storage capacity. Residual variance, which may reflect the ability to coordinate storage and processing, also predicted academic achievement. These results challenge the view that complex span taps a limited-capacity resource pool shared between processing and storage operations. Rather, they are consistent with a multiple-component model in which separate resource pools support the processing and storage functions of working memory.

Related collections

Most cited references 49

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Working memory, short-term memory, and general fluid intelligence: a latent-variable approach.

Randall Engle, Stephen W. Tuholski, James E Laughlin … (1999)

A study was conducted in which 133 participants performed 11 memory tasks (some thought to reflect working memory and some thought to reflect short-term memory), 2 tests of general fluid intelligence, and the Verbal and Quantitative Scholastic Aptitude Tests. Structural equation modeling suggested that short-term and working memories reflect separate but highly related constructs and that many of the tasks used in the literature as working memory tasks reflect a common construct. Working memory shows a strong connection to fluid intelligence, but short-term memory does not. A theory of working memory capacity and general fluid intelligence is proposed: The authors argue that working memory capacity and fluid intelligence reflect the ability to keep a representation active, particularly in the face of interference and distraction. The authors also discuss the relationship of this capability to controlled attention, and the functions of the prefrontal cortex.

0 comments Cited 536 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

What one intelligence test measures: a theoretical account of the processing in the Raven Progressive Matrices Test.

Patricia Carpenter, Marcel Just, Peter Shell (1990)

The cognitive processes in a widely used, nonverbal test of analytic intelligence, the Raven Progressive Matrices Test (Raven, 1962), are analyzed in terms of which processes distinguish between higher scoring and lower scoring subjects and which processes are common to all subjects and all items on the test. The analysis is based on detailed performance characteristics, such as verbal protocols, eye-fixation patterns, and errors. The theory is expressed as a pair of computer simulation models that perform like the median or best college students in the sample. The processing characteristic common to all subjects is an incremental, reiterative strategy for encoding and inducing the regularities in each problem. The processes that distinguish among individuals are primarily the ability to induce abstract relations and the ability to dynamically manage a large set of problem-solving goals in working memory.