Individual differences in working memory capacity and search efficiency

被引:0
作者
Ashley L. Miller
Nash Unsworth
机构
[1] 1227 University of Oregon,Department of Psychology
来源
Memory & Cognition | 2018年 / 46卷
关键词
individual differences; memory; recall; working memory;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
In two experiments, we examined how various learning conditions impact the relation between working memory capacity (WMC) and memory search abilities. Experiment 1 employed a delayed free recall task with semantically related words to induce the buildup of proactive interference (PI) and revealed that the buildup of PI differentially impacted recall accuracy and recall latency for low-WMC and high-WMC individuals. Namely, the buildup of PI impaired recall accuracy and slowed recall latency for low-WMC individuals to a greater extent than what was observed for high-WMC individuals. To provide a circumstance in which previously learned information remains relevant over the course of learning, Experiment 2 required participants to complete a multitrial delayed free recall task with unrelated words. Results revealed that with increased practice with the same word list, WMC-related differences were eventually eliminated in interresponse times (IRTs) and recall accuracy, but not recall latency. Thus, despite still accumulating larger search sets, low-WMC individuals searched LTM as efficiently as high-WMC individuals. Collectively, these results are consistent with the notion that under normal free recall conditions, low-WMC individuals search LTM less efficiently than do high-WMC individuals because of their reliance on noisy temporal–contextual cues at retrieval. However, it appears that under conditions in which previously learned items remain relevant at recall, this tendency to rely on vague self-generated retrieval cues can actually facilitate the ability to accurately and quickly recall information.
引用
收藏
页码:1149 / 1163
页数:14
相关论文
共 74 条
[1]  
Davis HP(2003)Acquisition, recall, and forgetting of verbal information in long-term memory by young, middle-aged, and elderly individuals Cortex 39 1063-1091
[2]  
Small SA(2016)Comparing the Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients across distributions and sample sizes: A tutorial using simulations and empirical data Psychological Methods 21 273-290
[3]  
Stern Y(1996)A decomposition of age-related differences in multitrial free recall Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition 3 2-14
[4]  
Mayeux R(1990)A global developmental trend in cognitive processing speed Child Development 61 653-663
[5]  
Feldstein SN(1988)Judgements of frequency and recognition memory in a multiple-trace memory model Psychological Review 4 528-551
[6]  
Keller FR(2000)Working memory capacity, proactive interference, and divided attention: Limits on long term memory retrieval Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 26 336-358
[7]  
de Winter Joost C. F.(2015)The contribution of encoding and retrieval processes to proactive interference Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 41 1778-1789
[8]  
Gosling Samuel D.(2013)Rethinking familiarity: Remember/know judgments in free recall Journal of Memory and Language 68 333-349
[9]  
Potter Jeff(1970)Interresponse times in single-trial free recall Journal of Experimental Psychology 86 263-267
[10]  
Dunlosky J(1996)On the relative and absolute strength of a memory trace Memory & Cognition 24 188-201