On the nature of forgetting and the processing-storage relationship in reading span performance

被引:97
作者
Saito, S [1 ]
Miyake, A
机构
[1] Kyoto Univ, Dept Cognit Psychol Educ, Grad Sch Educ, Sakyo Ku, Kyoto 6068501, Japan
[2] Univ Colorado, Dept Psychol, Boulder, CO 80309 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
working memory; reading span test; task switching hypothesis; resource sharing hypothesis; time-based forgetting; interference;
D O I
10.1016/j.jml.2003.12.003
中图分类号
H0 [语言学];
学科分类号
030303 ; 0501 ; 050102 ;
摘要
Four experiments examined the nature of forgetting and the processing-storage relationship during performance on a prevalent working memory task, the reading span test. Using two different presentation paradigms, Experiments I and 2 replicated Towse, Hitch, and Hutton's (1998, 2000) finding that the Short-Final lists, which presented a long sentence first and a short sentence last, led to better recall performance than the reverse-order Long-Final lists. This effect was still obtained when the retention duration for the target words was held constant and the amount of sentence processing required during that interval was varied (Experiment 3). However, the effect disappeared when the retention duration was varied while holding constant the amount of sentence processing required (Experiment 4). These results suggest that the amount of processing activities, not the sheer passage of time, may be the critical factor underlying the sentence order effect, thereby challenging purely time-based explanations of forgetting during reading span performance. In addition, the analysis of reading times (Experiment 1) revealed that the number of memory items had a subtle yet reliable negative effect on reading times, suggesting that the processing and storage requirements of the reading span test are not completely independent. (C) 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:425 / 443
页数:19
相关论文
共 44 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], MODELS WORKING MEMOR, DOI DOI 10.1017/CB09781139174909
[2]   Developmental increase in working memory span: Resource sharing or temporal decay? [J].
Barrouillet, P ;
Camos, V .
JOURNAL OF MEMORY AND LANGUAGE, 2001, 45 (01) :1-20
[3]  
BARROUILLET P, IN PRESS J EXPT PSYC
[4]   The complexities of complex span: Explaining individual differences in working memory in children and adults [J].
Bayliss, DM ;
Jarrold, C ;
Gunn, DM ;
Baddeley, AD .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-GENERAL, 2003, 132 (01) :71-92
[5]   OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY AND THE GROWTH OF SHORT-TERM-MEMORY SPAN [J].
CASE, R ;
KURLAND, DM ;
GOLDBERG, J .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL CHILD PSYCHOLOGY, 1982, 33 (03) :386-404
[6]   Working memory, inhibitory control, and reading disability [J].
Chiappe, P ;
Hasher, L ;
Siegel, LS .
MEMORY & COGNITION, 2000, 28 (01) :8-17
[7]  
Cohen J., 1988, STAT POWER ANAL BEHA
[8]   Children's working-memory processes: A response-timing analysis [J].
Cowan, N ;
Towse, JN ;
Hamilton, Z ;
Saults, JS ;
Elliott, EM ;
Lacey, JF ;
Moreno, MV ;
Hitch, GJ .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-GENERAL, 2003, 132 (01) :113-132
[9]   MORA OR PHONEME - FURTHER EVIDENCE FOR LANGUAGE-SPECIFIC LISTENING [J].
CUTLER, A ;
OTAKE, T .
JOURNAL OF MEMORY AND LANGUAGE, 1994, 33 (06) :824-844
[10]   Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis [J].
Daneman, M ;
Merikle, PM .
PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW, 1996, 3 (04) :422-433