Abstract
Some research on attentional control in working memory has emphasized theoretical capacity differences. However, strategic behavior, which has been relatively unexplored, can also influence attentional control and its relationship to cognitive performance. In two experiments, we examined the relationship between attentional control (measured with operation span) and interference in a part-list cuing paradigm. Paradoxically, the results indicated that superior attentional control was related to increased interference. This relationship reflected the participants’ use of more complex encoding strategies, rather than superior interference control at retrieval, and was eliminated following brief encoding strategy training. The results suggest that complex span measures sometimes predict individual differences in task strategies related to interference control and that these strategies may be amenable to training. The implications for working memory research and the roles of strategies in basic memory and attention paradigms are briefly discussed.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, M. C., Bjork, E. L., &Bjork, R. A. (1994). Remembering can cause forgetting: Retrieval dynamics in long-term memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,20, 1063–1087.
Barrett, L. R., Tugade, M. M., &Engle, R. W. (2004). Individual differences in working memory capacity and dual-process theories of mind.Psychological Bulletin,130, 553–573.
Basden, B. H., Basden, D. R., &Stephens, J. P. (2002). Part-set cuing of order information in recall tests.Journal of Memory & Language,47, 517–529.
Basden, D. R., &Basden, B. H. (1995). Some tests of the strategy disruption interpretation of part-list cuing inhibition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 1656–1669.
Bäuml, K.-H., &Aslan, A. (2004). Part-list cuing as instructed retrieval inhibition.Memory & Cognition,32, 610–617.
Bower, G. H., &Clark, M. C. (1969). Narrative stories as mediators for serial learning.Psychonomic Science,14, 181–182.
Bryan, J., Luszcz, M. A., &Pointer, S. (1999). Executive function and processing resources as predictors of adult age differences in the implementation of encoding strategies.Aging, Neuropsychology, & Cognition,6, 273–287.
Daneman, M., &Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,19, 450–466.
Delaney, P. F., & Sahakyan, L. (in press). Unexpected costs of high working memory capacity following directed forgetting and contextual change manipulations.Memory & Cognition.
Dempster, F. N., &Corkill, A. J. (1999). Interference and inhibition in cognition and behavior Unifying themes for educational psychology.Educational Psychology Review,11, 1–88.
Ericsson, K. A., &Kintsch, W. (1995). Long-term working memory.Psychological Review,102, 211–245.
Foos, P. W., &Clark, M. C. (2000). Old age, inhibition, and the part-set cuing effectEducational Gerontology,26, 155–160.
Friedman, N. P., &Miyake, A. (2004a). The reading span test and its predictive power for reading comprehension ability.Journal of Memory & Language,51, 136–158.
Friedman, N. P., &Miyake, A. (2004b). The relations among inhibition and interference control functions: A latent-variable analysis.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,133, 101–135.
Friendly, M., Franklin, P. E., Hoffman, D., &Rubin, D. C. (1982). The Toronto Word Pool: Norms for imagery, concreteness, orthographic variables, and grammatical usage for 1,080 words.Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation,14, 375–399.
Hasher, L., &Zacks, R. R. (1988). Working memory, comprehension, and aging: A review and a new view. In G. H. Bower (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 22, pp. 193–225). San Diego: Academic Press.
Hunt, R. R. (1976). List context effects: Inaccessibility or indecision?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory,2, 423–430.
Kane, M. J., &Engle, R. W. (2000). Working memory capacity, proactive interference, and divided attention: Limits on long-term memory retrieval.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,26, 336–358.
Kane, M. J., &Engle, R. W. (2002). The role of prefrontal cortex in working-memory capacity, executive attention, and general fluid intelligence: An individual-differences perspective.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,9, 637–671.
Kieras, D. E., &Meyer, D. E. (2000). The role of cognitive task analysis in the application of predictive models of human performance. In J. M. Schraagen, S. F. Chipman, & V. L. Shalin (Eds.),Cognitive task analysis (pp. 237–260). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Marsh, E. J., Dolan, P. O., Balota, D. A., &Roediger, H. L., III (2004). Part-set cuing effects in younger and older adults.Psychology & Aging,19, 134–144.
McNamara, D. S., &McDaniel, M. A. (2004). Suppressing irrelevant information: Knowledge activation or inhibition?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,30, 465–482.
McNamara, D. S., &Scott, J. L. (2001). Working memory capacity and strategy use.Memory & Cognition,29, 10–17.
Meyer, D. E., &Kieras, D. E. (1997). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms.Psychological Review,104, 3–65.
Nickerson, R. S. (1984). Retrieval inhibition from part-set cuing: A persisting enigma in memory research.Memory & Cognition,12, 531–552.
Reysen, M. B., &Nakne, J. S. (2002). Part-set cuing of false memories.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,9, 389–393.
Rhodes, M. G., &Kelley, C. M. (2005). Executive processes, memory accuracy, and memory monitoring: An aging and individual difference analysis.Journal of Memory & Language,52, 578–594.
Rosen, V. M., &Engle, R. W. (1997). The role of working memory capacity in retrieval.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,126, 211–227.
Rougier, N. P., Noëlle, D. C., Braver, T. S., Cohen, J. D., &O’Reilly, R. C. (2005). Prefrontal cortex and flexible cognitive control: Rules without symbols.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,102, 7338–7343.
Rundus, D. (1973). Negative effects of using list items as recall cues.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,12, 43–50.
Sahakyan, L., &Kelley, C. M. (2002). A contextual change account of the directed forgetting effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,28, 1064–1072.
Schunn, C. D., Lovett, M. C., &Reder, L. M. (2001). Awareness and working memory in strategy adaptivity.Memory & Cognition,29, 254–266.
Slamecka, N. J. (1968). An examination of trace storage in free recall.Journal of Experimental Psychology,76, 504–513.
Turley-Ames, K., &Whitfield, M. M. (2003). Strategy training and working memory task performance.Journal of Memory & Language,49, 446–468.
Turner, M. L., &Engle, R. W. (1989). Is working memory capacity task dependent?Journal of Memory & Language,28, 127–154.
Unsworth, N., Schrock, J. C., &Engle, R. W. (2004). Working memory capacity and the antisaccade task: Individual differences in voluntary saccade control.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,30, 1302–1321.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cokely, E.T., Kelley, C.M. & Gilchrist, A.L. Sources of individual differences in working memory: Contributions of strategy to capacity. Psychon Bull Rev 13, 991–997 (2006). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213914
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213914