Working memory capacity, short-term memory capacity, and the continued influence effect: A latent-variable analysis

被引:53
作者
Brydges, Christopher R. [1 ]
Gignac, Gilles E. [1 ]
Ecker, Ullrich K. H. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Western Australia, Sch Psychol Sci, Mailbag M304,35 Stirling Highway, Perth, WA 6009, Australia
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
Individual differences; Working memory; Short-term memory; Continued influence effect; INDIVIDUAL-DIFFERENCES; SPAN TASKS; MISINFORMATION; ABILITIES; KNOWLEDGE;
D O I
10.1016/j.intell.2018.03.009
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Misinformation often affects inferences and judgments even after it has been retracted and discredited. This is known as the continued influence effect. Memory processes have been theorized to contribute to the continued influence effect, and much previous research has focussed on the role of long-term memory processes at the time misinformation is retrieved during inferential reasoning and judgments. Recently, however, experimental research has focussed upon the role of working memory (WM) processes engaged in the updating and integration of information, when the retraction is encoded. From an individual differences perspective, susceptibility to continued influence effects should be predicted by a person's WM abilities, if continued reliance on misinformation is influenced, at least in part, by insufficient integration of the initial misinformation and its subsequent retraction. Consequently, we hypothesized that WM capacity would predict susceptibility to continued influence effects uniquely and more substantially than short-term memory (STM) capacity. Participants (N = 216) completed a continued-influence task, as well as a battery of WM and STM capacity tasks. Based on a latent variable model, our hypothesis was supported (WM capacity: beta = -0.36, p = .013; STM capacity: beta = 0.22, p = .187). Consequently, we suggest that low WM capacity is a measurable "risk factor" for continued reliance on misinformation.
引用
收藏
页码:117 / 122
页数:6
相关论文
共 48 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], CONFIRMATORY FACTOR
  • [2] Arbuckle J.L., 2016, IBM SPSS Amos 24 user's guide
  • [3] Atkinson R.C., 1977, PSYCHOL LEARNING MOT, P7, DOI [10.1016/B978-0-12-121050-2.50006-5, DOI 10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60422-3, 10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60422-3]
  • [4] A theoretical review of the misinformation effect: Predictions from an activation-based memory model
    Ayers, MS
    Reder, LM
    [J]. PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW, 1998, 5 (01) : 1 - 21
  • [5] Working memory
    Baddeley, Alan
    [J]. CURRENT BIOLOGY, 2010, 20 (04) : R136 - R140
  • [6] MENTAL MODELS IN NARRATIVE COMPREHENSION
    BOWER, GH
    MORROW, DG
    [J]. SCIENCE, 1990, 247 (4938) : 44 - 48
  • [7] Braver T.S., 2008, HDB AGING COGNITION, V3rd, P311, DOI DOI 10.4324/9780203837665.CH7
  • [8] Complex span tasks, simple span tasks, and cognitive abilities: A reanalysis of key studies
    Colom, R
    Rebollo, I
    Abad, FJ
    Shih, PC
    [J]. MEMORY & COGNITION, 2006, 34 (01) : 158 - 171
  • [9] Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user's guide
    Conway, ARA
    Kane, MJ
    Bunting, MF
    Hambrick, DZ
    Wilhelm, O
    Engle, RW
    [J]. PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW, 2005, 12 (05) : 769 - 786
  • [10] What are the differences between long-term, short-term, and working memory?
    Cowan, Nelson
    [J]. ESSENCE OF MEMORY, 2008, 169 : 323 - 338