Does domain knowledge moderate involvement of working memory capacity in higher-level cognition? A test of three models

被引:45
作者
Hambrick, DZ [1 ]
Oswald, FL
机构
[1] Michigan State Univ, Dept Psychol, E Lansing, MI 48824 USA
[2] Michigan State Univ, Cognit Sci Program, E Lansing, MI 48824 USA
关键词
working memory capacity; domain-specific knowledge; higher-level cognition; memory;
D O I
10.1016/j.jml.2005.01.004
中图分类号
H0 [语言学];
学科分类号
030303 ; 0501 ; 050102 ;
摘要
Research suggests that both working memory capacity and domain knowledge con tribute to individual differences in higher-level cognition. This study evaluated three hypotheses concerning the interplay between these factors. The compensation hypothesis predicts that domain knowledge attenuates the influence of working memory capacity on higher-level cognition, whereas the rich-get-richer hypothesis predicts that working memory capacity enhances use of domain knowledge. The independent influences hypothesis states simply that working memory capacity and domain knowledge make additive contributions to higher-level cognition. Participants representing wide ranges of working memory capacity and knowledge of baseball performed tasks that emphasized keeping track of information in a dynamic environment. The baseball task involved tracking the movements of baseball players on a baseball diamond. The spaceship task was structurally isomorphic to this task but its content was arbitrary. Results revealed greater use of baseball knowledge in the baseball task than in the spaceship task. However, even at high levels of baseball knowledge, this knowledge use did not alter the relationship between working memory capacity and task performance. This finding is inconsistent with compensation and rich-get-richer hypotheses. Instead, it suggests that working memory capacity and domain knowledge may operate independently under certain conditions. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:377 / 397
页数:21
相关论文
共 66 条
[21]   INDIVIDUAL-DIFFERENCES IN WORKING MEMORY AND READING [J].
DANEMAN, M ;
CARPENTER, PA .
JOURNAL OF VERBAL LEARNING AND VERBAL BEHAVIOR, 1980, 19 (04) :450-466
[22]  
Engle R.W., 1999, MODELS WORKING MEMOR, P102, DOI [DOI 10.1017/CBO9781139174909.007, 10.1017/CBO9781139174909.007]
[23]   Working memory, short-term memory, and general fluid intelligence: A latent-variable approach [J].
Engle, RW ;
Tuholski, SW ;
Laughlin, JE ;
Conway, ARA .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-GENERAL, 1999, 128 (03) :309-331
[24]   LONG-TERM WORKING-MEMORY [J].
ERICSSON, KA ;
KINTSCH, W .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 1995, 102 (02) :211-245
[25]   INDIVIDUAL-DIFFERENCES IN REPROCESSING OF TEXT [J].
HAENGGI, D ;
PERFETTI, CA .
JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1992, 84 (02) :182-192
[26]   PROCESSING COMPONENTS OF COLLEGE-LEVEL READING-COMPREHENSION [J].
HAENGGI, D ;
PERFETTI, CA .
DISCOURSE PROCESSES, 1994, 17 (01) :83-104
[27]   RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF APTITUDE AND PRIOR DOMAIN KNOWLEDGE ON IMMEDIATE AND DELAYED POSTTESTS [J].
HALL, VC ;
EDMONDSON, B .
JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1992, 84 (02) :219-223
[28]   Why are some people more knowledgeable than others? A longitudinal study of knowledge acquisition [J].
Hambrick, DZ .
MEMORY & COGNITION, 2003, 31 (06) :902-917
[29]   Effects of domain knowledge, working memory capacity, and age on cognitive performance: An investigation of the knowledge-is-power hypothesis [J].
Hambrick, DZ ;
Engle, RW .
COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2002, 44 (04) :339-387
[30]  
HAMBRICK DZ, 2003, NATURE PROBLEM SOLVI