![]() ![]() Prior research has suggested that people who stutter exhibit differences in some working memory tasks, particularly when more phonologically complex stimuli are used. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved). It is argued further that this approach points toward the value of attempting to integrate rather than proliferate theories of working memory. It is argued that experimenters should not assume that participants perform the same task in the same way under different experimental conditions and that carefulty investigation of how participants change their strategies in response to changes in experimental conditions has considerable potential for resolving theoretical challenges. For arithmetic verification, articulatory suppression and dual task resulted in a reduction in reports of a counting strategy and an increase in reports of a retrieval strategy for arithmetic knowledge. Under both dual task and articulatory suppression, more participants reported attempting to remember fewer memory items than were presented (memory reduction strategy). Elaboration and clustering strategies were reported less for memory under dual task compared with single task. Results indicated that articulatory suppression was associated with reduced reports of the use of rehearsal and clustering strategies but to an increase of the reported use of a visual strategy. In three experiments, we investigated whether changes in participant-reported strategies across single- and dual-task conditions might help resolve this debate by offering new insights that lead to fruitful integration of theories rather than perpetuating debate by attempting to identify which theory best fits the data. Most previous research on this topic has focused on participant performance data. How working memory supports dual-task performance is the focus of a long-standing debate. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved). We consider the implications of the data as constraints on theories of working memory storage and maintenance. Previous capacity estimates are consistent with the sum of central plus peripheral components observed here. We consistently find that the central contribution is smaller than was suggested by Saults and Cowan (2007) and that the peripheral contribution is often much larger when the task does not require the binding of features within an object. In addition to the exploration of many parameters in 9 new dual-task experiments and reanalysis of some prior evidence, the innovations of the present work compared to previous studies of memory for 2 stimulus sets include (a) use of a principled set of formulas to estimate the number of items in working memory and (b) a model to dissociate central components, which are allocated to very different stimulus sets depending on the instructions, from peripheral components, which are used for only 1 kind of material. ![]() This study reexamines the issue of how much of working memory storage is central, or shared across sensory modalities and verbal and nonverbal codes, and how much is peripheral, or specific to a modality or code. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |