Cognitive Processing

, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp 405–413 | Cite as

The role of working memory in inferential sentence comprehension

  • Ana Isabel Pérez
  • Daniela Paolieri
  • Pedro Macizo
  • Teresa Bajo
Short Report


Existing literature on inference making is large and varied. Trabasso and Magliano (Discourse Process 21(3):255–287, 1996) proposed the existence of three types of inferences: explicative, associative and predictive. In addition, the authors suggested that these inferences were related to working memory (WM). In the present experiment, we investigated whether WM capacity plays a role in our ability to answer comprehension sentences that require text information based on these types of inferences. Participants with high and low WM span read two narratives with four paragraphs each. After each paragraph was read, they were presented with four true/false comprehension sentences. One required verbatim information and the other three implied explicative, associative and predictive inferential information. Results demonstrated that only the explicative and predictive comprehension sentences required WM: participants with high verbal WM were more accurate in giving explanations and also faster at making predictions relative to participants with low verbal WM span; in contrast, no WM differences were found in the associative comprehension sentences. These results are interpreted in terms of the causal nature underlying these types of inferences.


Working memory Comprehension sentences Inference making Text comprehension 


  1. Allende I (1989) Cuentos de Eva Luna: Walimai. English–Spanish translation: Peden MS (1999) Walimai. In: King JR (ed) Parallel text-short stories in Spanish. Penguin Books, London, pp 58–73Google Scholar
  2. Baddeley A (2000) The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory? Trends Cogn Sci 4(11):417–423PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baddeley AD, Hitch GJ (1974) Working memory. In: Bower G (ed) Recent advances in learning and motivation. Academic Press, New York, pp 47–90Google Scholar
  4. Barreyro JP, Cevasco J, Burín D, Marotto CM (2012) Working Memory capacity and individual differences in the making of reinstatement and elaborative inferences. Span J Psychol 15:471–479PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beeman M (1993) Semantic processing in the right hemisphere may contribute to drawing inferences from discourse. Brain Lang 44(1):80–120PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beeman MJ, Bowden EM, Gernsbacher MA (2000) Right and left hemisphere cooperation for drawing predictive and coherence inferences during normal story comprehension. Brain Lang 71(2):310–336PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cain K, Oakhill J (2006) Profiles of children with specific reading comprehension difficulties. Br J Educ Psychol 76:683–696PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cain K, Oakhill J, Bryant PE (2004) Children’s reading comprehension ability: concurrent prediction by working memory, verbal ability, and component skills. J Educ Psychol 96:31–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Calvo MG, Castillo MD, Schmalhofer F (2006) Strategic influence on the time course of predictive inferences in reading. Mem Cogn 34(1):68–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carretti B, Borella E, Cornoldi C, De Beni R (2009) Role of working memory in explaining the performance of individuals with specific reading comprehension difficulties: a meta-analysis. Learn Individ Differ 19(2):246–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chrysochoou E, Bablekou Z, Tsigilis N (2011) Working memory contributions to reading comprehension components in middle childhood children. Am J Psychol 124(3):275–289PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Daneman M, Carpenter PA (1980) Individual differences in working memory and reading. J Verbal Learn Verbal Behav 19:450–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Daneman M, Merikle PM (1996) Working memory and language comprehension: a meta-analysis. Psychon Bull Rev 3:422–433PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Friedman NP, Miyake A (2000) Differential roles for visuospatial and verbal working memory in situation model construction. J Exp Psychol Gen 129(1):61PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fuentes C (1995) La frontera de cristal: Las amigas. English–Spanish translation: Adam AM (1999). Las amigas. In: King JR (ed) Parallel text-short stories in Spanish. Penguin Books, London, pp 106–141Google Scholar
  16. Graesser AC, Clark LF (1985) Structures and procedures of implicit knowledge. Adv Discourse ProcessGoogle Scholar
  17. Graesser AC, Singer M, Trabasso T (1994) Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychol Rev 101(3):371–395PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Graesser A, Wiemer-Hastings P, Wiemer-Hastings K (2001) Constructing inferences and relations during text comprehension. In: Sanders T, Schilperoord J, Spooren W (eds) Text representation: linguistic and psycholinguistic aspects. Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp 249–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hagaman JA (2008) Influences on the generation of instrumental inferences during text comprehension. (Order no. AAI3329164, dissertation abstracts international: section B: the sciences and engineering, 5801Google Scholar
  20. Harmon-Vukić M, Guéraud S, Lassonde KA, O’Brien EJ (2009) The activation and instantiation of instrumental inferences. Discourse Process 46(5):467–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Joss LM, Virtue S (2009) Hemispheric processing of semantic information: the effects of the semantic priming task and working memory capacity. Laterality 14(4):345–361PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kim S, Yoon M, Kim W, Lee S, Kang E (2012) Neural correlates of bridging inferences and coherence processing. J Psycholinguist Res 41(4):311–321PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. King J, Just MA (1991) Individual differences in syntactic processing: the role of working memory. J Mem Lang 30(5):580–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kintsch W (1988) The use of knowledge in discourse processing: a construction integration model. Psychol Rev 95:163–182PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kintsch W (1998) Comprehension: a paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Linderholm T (2002) Predictive inference generation as a function of working memory capacity and causal text constraints. Discourse Process 34(3):259–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Macizo P, Bajo MT (2006) Reading for repetition and reading for translation: do they involve the same processes? Cognition 99(1):1–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Magliano JP, Baggett WB, Johnson BK, Graesser AC (1993) The time course of generating causal antecedent and causal consequence inferences. Discourse Process 16(1–2):35–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McKeown MG, Beck IL, Blake RG (2009) Rethinking reading comprehension instruction: a comparison of instruction for strategies and content approaches. Read Res Q 44(3):218–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McKoon G, Ratcliff R (1992) Inference during reading. Psychol Rev 99(3):440PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Morrow DG, Bower GH, Greenspan SE (1989) Updating situation models during narrative comprehension. J Mem Lang 24:304–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mundfrom DJ, Whitcomb A (1998) Imputing missing values: the effect on the accuracy of classification. Mult Linear Regres Viewp 25(1):13–19Google Scholar
  33. Narváez D, van den Broek P, Ruiz AB (1999) The influence of reading purpose on inference generation and comprehension in reading. J Educ Psychol 91(3):488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Oakhill J (1983) Instantiation in skilled and less skilled comprehenders. Q J Exp Psychol Sect A 35(3):441–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Peracchi KA, O’Brien EJ (2004) Character profiles and the activation of predictive inferences. Mem Cogn 32(7):1044–1052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Potts GR, Keenan JM, Golding JM (1988) Assessing the occurrence of elaborative inferences: lexical decision versus naming. J Mem Lang 27(4):399–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Radvansky GA, Copeland DE (2004) Working memory span and situation model processing. Am J Psychol 117:191–213Google Scholar
  38. Radvansky GA, Dijkstra K (2007) Aging and situation model processing. Psychon Bull Rev 14(6):1027–1042PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rapp DN, van den Broek P, McMaster KL, Kendeou P, Espin CA (2007) Higher order cognitive processes in struggling readers: a perspective for research and intervention. Sci Stud Read 11:289–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schacter DL, Addis DR (2007) The cognitive neuroscience of constructive memory: remembering the past and imagining the future. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 362(1481):773–786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schacter DL, Addis DR, Buckner RL (2007) Remembering the past to imagine the future: the prospective brain. Nat Rev Neurosci 8(9):657–661PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Singer M, Andruslak P, Reisdorf P, Black NL (1992) Individual differences in bridging inference processes. Mem Cogn 20(5):539–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. St. George M, Mannes S, Hoffman JE (1997) Individual differences in inference generation: an ERP analysis. J Cogn Neurosci 9(6):776–787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Suh SY, Trabasso T (1993) Inferences during reading: converging evidence from discourse analysis, talk-aloud protocols, and recognition priming. J Mem Lang 32(3):279–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Trabasso T, Magliano JP (1996) Conscious understanding during comprehension. Discourse Process 21(3):255–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Van den Broek P (1990) The causal inference maker: towards a process model of inference generation in text comprehension. In: Balota DA, Flores d'Arcais GB, Rayner K (eds) Comprehension processes in reading. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp 423-445Google Scholar
  47. Van den Broek P, Fletcher CR, Risden K (1993) Investigations of inferential processes in reading: a theoretical and methodological integration. Discourse Process 16(1–2):169–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Van den Broek P, Lorch RF, Linderholm T, Gustafson M (2001a) The effects of readers’ goals on inference generation and memory for texts. Mem Cogn 29:1081–1087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Van den Broek P, Tzeng Y, Risden K, Trabasso T, Basche P (2001b) Inferential questioning: effects on comprehension of narrative texts as a function of grade and timing. J Educ Psychol 93(3):521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Van Dijk TA, Kintsch W (1983) Strategies of discourse comprehension. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  51. Virtue S, van den Broek P, Linderholm T (2006) Hemispheric processing of inferences: the effects of textual constraint and working memory capacity. Mem Cogn 34(6):1341–1354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Virtue S, Parrish T, Jung-Beeman M (2008) Inferences during story comprehension: cortical recruitment affected by predictability of events and working memory capacity. J Cogn Neurosci 20(12):2274–2284PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Waters GS, Caplan D (1996) The capacity theory of sentence comprehension: a critique of Just and Carpenter. Psychol Rev 103:761–772Google Scholar
  54. Zwaan RA, Radvansky GA (1998) Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychol Bull 123(2):162–185PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Marta Olivetti Belardinelli and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ana Isabel Pérez
    • 1
  • Daniela Paolieri
    • 1
  • Pedro Macizo
    • 1
  • Teresa Bajo
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Experimental PsychologyUniversity of GranadaGranadaSpain

Personalised recommendations