Memory & Cognition

, Volume 37, Issue 3, pp 346–357 | Cite as

Interference between storage and processing in working memory: Feature overwriting, not similarity-based competition



Eight experiments with the complex span paradigm are presented to investigate why concurrent processing disrupts short-term retention. Increasing the pace of the processing task led to worse recall, supporting the hypothesis that the processing task distracts attention from maintenance operations. Neither phonological nor semantic similarity between memory items and processing-task material impaired memory. In contrast, the degree of phonological overlap between memory items and processing-task material affected recall negatively, supporting feature overwriting as one source of interference in the complex span paradigm. When compared directly, phonological overlap impaired memory, but similarity had a beneficial effect. These findings rule out response competition or confusion as a mechanism of interference between storage and processing.


  1. Ackerman, P. L., Beier, M. E., & Boyle, M. O. (2005). Working memory and intelligence: The same or different constructs? Psychological Bulletin, 131, 30–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Adams, J. A., Thorsheim, H. I., & McIntyre, J. S. (1969). Item length, acoustic similarity, and natural language mediation as variables in short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 80, 39–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baddeley, A. D. (1966). Short-term memory for word sequences as a function of acoustic, semantic, and formal similarity. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 362–365.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Baddeley, A. D., & Ecob, J. R. (1970). Simultaneous acoustic and semantic coding in short-term memory. Nature, 227, 288–289.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Barrouillet, P., Bernardin, S., & Camos, V. (2004). Time constraints and resource sharing in adults’ working memory spans. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 83–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bayliss, D. M., Jarrold, C., Gunn, D. M., & Baddeley, A. D. (2003). The complexities of complex span: Explaining individual differences in working memory in children and adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 71–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beaman, C. P. (2004). The irrelevant sound phenomenon revisited: What role for working memory capacity? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 30, 1106–1118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown, G. D. A., Preece, T., & Hulme, C. (2000). Oscillator-based memory for serial order. Psychological Review, 107, 127–181.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Bunting, M. F. (2006). Proactive interference and item similarity in working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 32, 183–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Burgess, N., & Hitch, G. J. (1999). Memory for serial order: A network model of the phonological loop and its timing. Psychological Review, 106, 551–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Carretti, B., Cornoldi, C., De Beni, R., & Palladino, P. (2004). What happens to information to be suppressed in working memory tasks? Short and long term effects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A, 1059–1084.Google Scholar
  12. Colom, R., Rebollo, I., Abad, F. J., & Shih, P. C. (2006). Complex span tasks, simple span tasks, and cognitive abilities: A reanalysis of key studies. Memory & Cognition, 34, 158–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Conlin, J. A., & Gathercole, S. E. (2006). Lexicality and interference in working memory in children and in adults. Journal of Memory & Language, 55, 363–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Conlin, J. A., Gathercole, S. E., & Adams, J. W. (2005). Stimulus similarity decrements in children’s working memory span. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 1434–1446.Google Scholar
  15. Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 19, 450–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Daneman, M., & Merikle, P. M. (1996). Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3 422–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Davis, C. J. (2005). N-Watch: A program for deriving neighborhood size and other psycholinguistic statistics. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 65–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Eich, J. M. (1982). A composite holographic associative recall model. Psychological Review, 89, 627–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fallon, A. B., Groves, K., & Tehan, G. (1999). Phonological similarity and trace degradation in the serial recall task: When CAT helps RAT, but not MAN. International Journal of Psychology, 34, 301–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Farrell, S. (2006). Mixed-list phonological similarity effects in delayed serial recall. Journal of Memory & Language, 55, 587–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gardiner, J. M., Craik, F. I. M., & Birtwistle, J. (1972). Retrieval cues and release from proactive inhibition. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 11, 778–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gupta, P., Lipinski, J., & Aktunc, E. (2005). Reexamining the phonological similarity effect in immediate serial recall: The roles of type of similarity, category cuing, and item recall. Memory & Cognition, 33, 1001–1016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Henson, R. N. A. (1998). Short-term memory for serial order: The start-end model. Cognitive Psychology, 36, 73–137.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Hudjetz, A., & Oberauer, K. (2007). The effects of processing time and processing rate on forgetting in working memory: Testing four models of the complex span paradigm. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1675–1684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hulme, C., Roodenrys, S., Brown, G., & Mercer, R. (1995). The role of long-term memory mechanisms in memory span. British Journal of Psychology, 86, 527–536.Google Scholar
  26. Lange, E. B., & Oberauer, K. (2005). Overwriting of phonemic features in serial recall. Memory, 13, 333–339.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Lewandowsky, S., Geiger, S. M., & Oberauer, K. (2008). Interference-based forgetting in short-term memory. Journal of Memory & Language, 59, 200–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lewandowsky, S., & Murdock, B. B. (1989). Memory for serial order. Psychological Review, 96, 25–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Li, K. Z. H. (1999). Selection from working memory: On the relationship between processing and storage components. Aging, Neuropsychology, & Cognition, 6, 99–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Maehara, Y., & Saito, S. (2007). The relationship between processing and storage in working memory span: Not two sides of the same coin. Journal of Memory & Language, 56, 212–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nairne, J. S. (1990). A feature model of immediate memory. Memory & Cognition, 18, 251–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Oberauer, K., & Kliegl, R. (2006). A formal model of capacity limits in working memory. Journal of Memory & Language, 55, 601–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Oberauer, K., & Lange, E. B. (2008). Interference in verbal working memory: Distinguishing similarity-based confusion, feature overwriting, and feature migration. Journal of Memory & Language, 58, 730–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Oberauer, K., Lange, E. [B.], & Engle, R. W. (2004). Working memory capacity and resistance to interference. Journal of Memory & Language, 51, 80–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Oberauer, K., & Lewandowsky, S. (2008). Forgetting in immediate serial recall: Decay, temporal distinctiveness, or interference? Psychological Review, 115, 544–576.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Page, M. P. A., & Norris, D. (1998). The primacy model: A new model of immediate serial recall. Psychological Review, 105, 761–781.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Palladino, P. (2006). The role of interference control in working memplausible ory: A study with children at risk of ADHD. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 2047–2055.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Raffone, A., & Wolters, G. (2001). A cortical mechanism for binding in visual working memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 13, 766–785.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Roodenrys, S., Hulme, C., Lethbridge, A., Hinton, M., & Nimmo, L. M. (2002). Word-frequency and phonological-neighborhood effects on verbal short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 28, 1019–1034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Saint-Aubin, J., & Poirier, M. (1999). Semantic similarity and immediate serial recall: Is there a detrimental effect on order information? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 52A, 367–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Saito, S., & Miyake, A. (2004). On the nature of forgetting and the processing-storage relationship in reading span performance. Journal of Memory & Language, 50, 425–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tehan, G., Hendry, L., & Kocinski, D. (2001). Word length and phonological similarity effects in simple, complex, and delayed serial recall tasks: Implications for working memory. Memory, 9, 333–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tehan, G., & Humphreys, M. S. (1995). Transient phonemic codes and immunity to proactive interference. Memory & Cognition, 23, 181–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tolan, G. A., & Tehan, G. (1999). Determinants of short-term forgetting: Decay, retroactive interference, or proactive interference? International Journal of Psychology, 34, 285–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Towse, J. N., Hitch, G. J., & Hutton, U. (2000). On the interpretation of working memory span in adults. Memory & Cognition, 28, 341–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Turner, M. L., & Engle, R. W. (1989). Is working memory capacity task dependent? Journal of Memory & Language, 28, 127–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of BristolBristolEngland

Personalised recommendations