期刊文献+

工作记忆广度:资源限制、记忆消退还是转换机制? 被引量:8

Working Memory Span:Resource Constraint,Memory Decay or Switching Mechanism?
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 为了检验工作记忆广度有限性的3种假说,即资源限制假说、记忆消退假说和转换机制假说,实验要求被试首先完成一项转换效率任务,然后完成工作记忆广度任务。结果发现,加工负荷对工作记忆广度具有重要影响,保持时间不影响工作记忆广度,转换效率与工作记忆广度也没有显著相关。实验结果支持工作记忆广度受认知资源限制的观点。 Introduction There are mainly three models concerning cognitive mechanisms underlying the limitations of working memory span, namely, resource - sharing model, task - switching model and time - based resource - sharing model. The resource - sharing model indicagtes that working memory span is constrained by limited cognitive resources. The task - switching model claims that memory decay is the main factor affecting working memory span. Finally, the time- based resource - sharing model suggests that working memory span is affected not only by limited attentional resource and memory decay, but also by switching mechanism. This experiment was conducted to test the resource constraint hypothesis, memory decay hypothesis and switching mechanism hypothesis proposed according to the three models. Method First, to test the resource constraint hypothesis, we manipulated the cognitive load of the processing component (hereinafter referred to as processing load) by designing two types of working memory span tasks with different levels of difficulty, one being continuous operation span task and the other de - de - de span task. In the continuous operation span task, some participants were asked to maintain consonant English letters while performing simple arithmetic operations, whereas the others were required to maintain the same letters while reading aloud the syllable de presented continuously in de - de - de span task. Second, to test the memory decay hypothesis, the retention duration was also manipulated and this was achieved by varying the number of sign - operand pairs in continuous span task and the number of de syllables in de- de - de span task. Under long retention duration conditions, the participants were asked to solve 4 sign - operand pairs of arithmetic operations and to read 13 de syllables respectively in the two span tasks. While under short retention duration conditions, the corresponding number was 2 and 7. Finally, to test the switching mechanism hypothesis, all the participants were required to complete a switching efficiency task before performing working memory span tasks. Switching efficiency was denoted by switching cost resulting from switching trials and repetition trials, and high switching cost meant low switching efficiency, whereas low switching cost meant high switching efficiency. 80 undergraduates and graduates were randomly assigned to the four working memory span tasks. Results Two - way (processing load retention duration) analyses of variance on the span data revealed that, there was a main significant effect of processing load, with de - de - de span being predominantly greater than continuous operation span, and that neither the retention duration nor the interaction between processing load and retention duration had a significant effect. Correlational analyses of switching cost and working memory span indicated that there was no systematic relation between them. Conclusion The results suggest that working memory span is constrained by limited cognitive resources, and mat memory decay and switching mechanism have no effect upon working memory span. Although the results supported the resource constraint hypothesis, further research needs to be done, for the nature of resource constraint remains to be an open question.
作者 张奇 王霞
出处 《心理学报》 CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2007年第5期777-784,共8页 Acta Psychologica Sinica
关键词 资源限制 记忆消退 转换机制 工作记忆广度 resource constraint, memory decay, switching mechanism, working memory span.
作者简介 通讯作者:张奇,E-mail:zq55822@163.com
  • 相关文献

参考文献27

  • 1Baddeley A D,Hitch G J.Working memory.In:G A Bower (Ed.),Recent advances in learning and motivation.New York:Academic Press,1974.47-90.
  • 2Logan G D.Working memory,task switching,and executive control in the task span procedure.Journal of Experimental Psychology:General,2004,133(2):218-236.
  • 3Friedman N P,Miyake A.The reading span test and its predictive power for reading comprehension ability.Journal of Memory and Language,2004,51:136-158.
  • 4Lepine R,Barrouillet P,Camos V.What makes working memory spans so predictive of high-level cognition? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,2005,12(1):165-170.
  • 5Conway A R A,Cowan N,Bunting M F,et al.A latent variable analysis of working memory capacity,short-term memory capacity,processing speed,and general fluid intelligence.Intelligence,2002,30:163-183.
  • 6李德明,刘昌,陈天勇,李贵芸.加工速度和工作记忆在认知年老化过程中的作用[J].心理学报,2003,35(4):471-475. 被引量:30
  • 7刘昌.加工速度、工作记忆与液态智力发展的关系(英文)[J].心理学报,2004,36(4):464-475. 被引量:12
  • 8Daneman M,Carpenter P A.Individual differences in working memory and reading.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,1980,19:450-466.
  • 9Case R,Kurland M,Goldberg J.Operation efficiency and the growth of short-term memory.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,1982,33:386-404
  • 10Towse J N,Hitch G J.Is there a relationship between task demand and storage space in tests of working memory capacity? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,1995,48(1):108-124.

二级参考文献48

  • 1[5]Salthouse T A. The processing-speed theory of adult age differences in cognition. Psychological Review, 1996, 103 : 403~428
  • 2[6]Vernon P A. Speed of information processing and general intelligence. Intelligence, 1983, 7: 53~70
  • 3[7]Jensen A R. Psychometric g as a focus of concerted research effort. Intelligence, 1987, 11:193~198
  • 4[8]Vernon P A, Nador S, Kantor L. reaction times and speed-ofprocessing: Their relationship to timed and untimed measures of intelligence. Intelligence, 1985, 9:357~374
  • 5[9]Vernon P A. The generality of g. Personality and Individual Differences, 1989, 10:803~804
  • 6[10]Kyllonen P C, Christal R E. Reasoning ability is (little more than) working-memory capacity?! Intelligence, 1990, 14:389~433
  • 7[11]Colom R, Flores-Mendoza C, Rebollo I. Working memory and intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 2003, 34:33~39
  • 8[12]Conway A R A, Kane M J, Engle R W. Working memory capacity and its relation to general intelligence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2003, 7:547~552
  • 9[13]Just M A, Carpenter P A. A capacity theory of comprehension:individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review, 1992, 99:122~149
  • 10[14]Engle R W, Tuholski S W, Laughlin J E, et al. Working memory, short-term memory and general fluid intelligence: a latent variable approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1999, 128:309~331

共引文献37

同被引文献97

引证文献8

二级引证文献25

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部