Matthew K Robison, Ashley L Miller, Elizabeth A Wiemers, Derek M Ellis, Nash Unsworth, Thomas S Redick, Gene A Brewer
{"title":"是什么让工作记忆发挥作用?对工作记忆能力预测能力的多方面阐述。","authors":"Matthew K Robison, Ashley L Miller, Elizabeth A Wiemers, Derek M Ellis, Nash Unsworth, Thomas S Redick, Gene A Brewer","doi":"10.1037/xge0001629","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Working memory capacity (WMC) has received a great deal of attention in cognitive psychology partly because WMC correlates broadly with other abilities (e.g., reading comprehension, second-language proficiency, fluid intelligence) and thus seems to be a critical aspect of cognitive ability. However, it is still rigorously debated <i>why</i> such correlations occur. Some theories posit a single ability (e.g., attention control, short-term memory capacity, controlled memory search) as the primary reason behind WMC's predictiveness, whereas others argue that WMC is predictive because it taps into multiple abilities. Here, we tested these single- and multifaceted accounts of WMC with a large-scale (<i>N</i> = 974) individual-differences investigation of WMC and three hypothesized mediators: attention control, primary memory, and secondary memory. We found evidence for a multifaceted account, such that no single ability could fully mediate the relation between WMC and higher order cognition (i.e., reading comprehension and fluid intelligence). Further, such an effect held regardless of whether WMC was measured via complex span or n-back. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15698,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","volume":"153 9","pages":"2193-2215"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What makes working memory work? A multifaceted account of the predictive power of working memory capacity.\",\"authors\":\"Matthew K Robison, Ashley L Miller, Elizabeth A Wiemers, Derek M Ellis, Nash Unsworth, Thomas S Redick, Gene A Brewer\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/xge0001629\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Working memory capacity (WMC) has received a great deal of attention in cognitive psychology partly because WMC correlates broadly with other abilities (e.g., reading comprehension, second-language proficiency, fluid intelligence) and thus seems to be a critical aspect of cognitive ability. However, it is still rigorously debated <i>why</i> such correlations occur. Some theories posit a single ability (e.g., attention control, short-term memory capacity, controlled memory search) as the primary reason behind WMC's predictiveness, whereas others argue that WMC is predictive because it taps into multiple abilities. Here, we tested these single- and multifaceted accounts of WMC with a large-scale (<i>N</i> = 974) individual-differences investigation of WMC and three hypothesized mediators: attention control, primary memory, and secondary memory. We found evidence for a multifaceted account, such that no single ability could fully mediate the relation between WMC and higher order cognition (i.e., reading comprehension and fluid intelligence). Further, such an effect held regardless of whether WMC was measured via complex span or n-back. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15698,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General\",\"volume\":\"153 9\",\"pages\":\"2193-2215\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001629\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001629","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
What makes working memory work? A multifaceted account of the predictive power of working memory capacity.
Working memory capacity (WMC) has received a great deal of attention in cognitive psychology partly because WMC correlates broadly with other abilities (e.g., reading comprehension, second-language proficiency, fluid intelligence) and thus seems to be a critical aspect of cognitive ability. However, it is still rigorously debated why such correlations occur. Some theories posit a single ability (e.g., attention control, short-term memory capacity, controlled memory search) as the primary reason behind WMC's predictiveness, whereas others argue that WMC is predictive because it taps into multiple abilities. Here, we tested these single- and multifaceted accounts of WMC with a large-scale (N = 974) individual-differences investigation of WMC and three hypothesized mediators: attention control, primary memory, and secondary memory. We found evidence for a multifaceted account, such that no single ability could fully mediate the relation between WMC and higher order cognition (i.e., reading comprehension and fluid intelligence). Further, such an effect held regardless of whether WMC was measured via complex span or n-back. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Experimental Psychology: General publishes articles describing empirical work that bridges the traditional interests of two or more communities of psychology. The work may touch on issues dealt with in JEP: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, JEP: Human Perception and Performance, JEP: Animal Behavior Processes, or JEP: Applied, but may also concern issues in other subdisciplines of psychology, including social processes, developmental processes, psychopathology, neuroscience, or computational modeling. Articles in JEP: General may be longer than the usual journal publication if necessary, but shorter articles that bridge subdisciplines will also be considered.