In two experiments, the locus of individual differences in working memory capacity and long-term memory recall was examined. Participants performed categorical cued and free recall tasks, and individual differences in the dynamics of recall were interpreted in terms of a hierarchical-search framework. The results from this study are in accordance with recent theorizing suggesting a strong relation between working memory capacity and retrieval from long-term memory. Furthermore, the results also indicate that individual differences in categorical recall are partially due to differences in accessibility. In terms of accessibility of target information, two important factors drive the difference between high- and low-working-memory-capacity participants. Low-working-memory-capacity participants fail to utilize appropriate retrieval strategies to access cues, and they also have difficulty resolving cue overload. Thus, when low-working-memory-capacity participants were given specific cues that activated a smaller set of potential targets, their recall performance was the same as that of high-working-memory-capacity participants.
BaileyH.DunloskyJ.KaneM.J. (2008). Why does working memory span predict complex cognition? Testing the strategy affordance hypothesis.Memory & Cognition, 36, 1383–1390.
2.
CantorJ.EngleR.W. (1993). Working memory capacity as long-term memory activation: An individual differences approach.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 19, 1101–1114.
3.
CohenB.H. (1966). Some-or-none characteristics of coding behavior.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 5, 182–187.
4.
CokelyE.T.KelleyC.M.GilchristA.H. (2006). Sources of individual differences in working memory: Contributions of strategy to capacity.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 991–997.
5.
ConwayA.R. A.CowanN.BuntingM.F.TherriaultD.J.MinkoffS.R. B. (2002). A latent variable analysis of working memory capacity, short-term memory capacity, processing speed, and general fluid intelligence.Intelligence, 30, 163–183.
6.
CowanN.TowseJ.N.HamiltonZ.SaultsJ.S.ElliotE.M.LaceyJ.F. (2003). Children's working-memory processes: A response-timing analysis.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 113–132.
7.
CraikF.I.ByrdM.SwansonJ.M. (1987). Patterns of memory loss in three elderly samples.Psychology and Aging, 2, 79–86.
8.
Dong, T. (1972). Cued partial recall of categorized words. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 93, 123–129.
9.
EngleR.W.KaneM.J. (2004). Executive attention, working memory capacity, and a two-factor theory of cognitive control.The psychology of learning and motivation, RossB.New York, NYElsevier44, 145–199.
10.
EysenckM.W.BaronC.R. (1974). Effects of cuing on recall from categorized word lists.Developmental Psychology, 10, 665–666.
11.
HealeyM.K.MiyakeM. (2009). The role of attention during retrieval in working memory span: A dual-task study.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 733–745.
12.
HeddenT.LautenschlagerG.ParkD.C. (2005). Contributions of processing ability and knowledge to verbal memory tasks across the adult lifespan.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 169–190.
13.
HultschD.F. (1975). Adult age differences in retrieval: Trace-dependent and cue-dependent forgetting.Developmental Psychology, 11, 197–201.
14.
Incisa Della RocchettaA.MilnerB. (1993). Strategic search and retrieval inhibition: The role of the frontal lobes.Neuropsychologia, 31, 503–524.
15.
JacobyL.L. (1973). Test appropriate strategies in retention of categorized lists.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 675–682.
16.
KaneM.J.EngleR.W. (2000). Working memory capacity, proactive interference, and divided attention: Limits on long-term retrieval.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 26, 333–358.
17.
MandlerG. (1975). Memory storage and retrieval: Some limits on the reach of attention and consciousness.Attention and Performance V, RabbittP.M. A.DornicS.New York, NYAcademic Press.
18.
MandlerG. (2011). From association to organization.Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 232–235.
19.
MiyakeA.ShahP (1999). Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control, MiyakeA.ShahP.New York, NYCambridge University Press.
20.
MogleJ.A.LovettB.J.StawskiR.S.SliwinskiM.J. (2008). What's so special about working memory? An examination of the relationship among working memory, secondary memory, and fluid intelligence.Psychological Science, 19, 1071–1077.
21.
MurdockB.B. (1976). Item and order information in short-term serial memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 105, 191–216.
22.
NelsonD.L.GoodmonL.B. (2003). Disrupting attention: The need for retrieval cues in working memory theories.Memory & Cognition, 31, 65–76.
23.
PattersonK.E. (1972). Some characteristics of retrieval limitations from long-term memory.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 685–691.
24.
Patterson, K. E., Meltzer, R. H., & Mandler, G. (1971). Inter-response times in categorized free recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 10, 417–426.
25.
PollioH.R.RichardsS.LucasR. (1969). Temporal properties of category recall.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8, 529–536.
26.
RaaijmakersJ.G. W.ShiffrinR.M. (1980). SAM: A theory of probabilistic search of associative memory.The psychology of learning and motivation, BowerG.New York, NYAcademic Press14,.
27.
RadvanskyG.A.CopelandD.E. (2006). Memory retrieval and interference: Working memory issues.Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 33–46.
28.
RedickT.S.BroadwayJ.M.MeierM.E.KuriakoseP.S.UnsworthN.KaneM.J. (in press). Measuring working memory capacity with automated complex span tasks.European Journal of Psychological Assessment,.
29.
RosenV.M.EngleR.W. (1997). The role of working memory capacity in retrieval.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 211–227.
30.
RouderJ.N.SpeckmanP.L.SunD.MoreyR.D.IversonG. (2009). Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 225–237.
31.
RundusD. (1973). Negative effects of using list items as recall cues.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 12, 43–50.
32.
SchmiedekF.OberauerK.WilhelmO.SüßH.M.WittmannW.W. (2007). Individual differences in components of reaction time distributions and their relations to working memory and intelligence.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 414–429.
33.
ShiffrinR.M. (1970). Memory search.Models of human memory, NormanD.A.New York, NYAcademic Press375–447.
34.
Shiffrin, R. M., & Atkinson, R. C. (1969). Storage and retrieval processes in long-term memory. Psychological Review, 79, 179–193.
35.
Tulving, E. (1983). Elements of episodic memory. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
36.
Tulving, E., & Pearstone, Z. (1966). Availability versus accessibility of information in memory for words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 5, 381–391.
37.
UnsworthN. (2007). Individual differences in working memory capacity and episodic retrieval: Examining the dynamics of delayed and continuous distractor free recall.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 33, 1020–1034.
38.
UnsworthN. (2008). Exploring the retrieval dynamics of delayed and final free recall: Further evidence for temporal-contextual search.Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 223–236.
39.
UnsworthN. (2009a). Examining variation in working memory capacity and retrieval in cued recall.Memory, 17, 386–396.
40.
UnsworthN. (2009b). Individual differences in self-initiated processing at encoding and retrieval: A latent variable analysis.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 257–266.
41.
UnsworthN. (2009c). Variation in working memory capacity, fluid intelligence, and episodic recall: A latent variable examination of differences in the dynamics of free recall.Memory & Cognition, 37, 837–849.
42.
UnsworthN. (2010). On the division of working memory and long-term memory and their relation to intelligence: A latent variable analysis.Acta Psychologica, 134, 16–28.
43.
UnsworthN.BrewerG.A.SpillersG.J. (2009). There's more to the working memory–fluid intelligence relationship than just secondary memory.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 931–937.
44.
UnsworthN.BrewerG.A.SpillersG.J. (2011). Variation in working memory capacity and episodic memory: Examining the importance of encoding specificity.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 1113–1118.
45.
UnsworthN.EngleR.W. (2007). The nature of individual differences in working memory capacity: Active maintenance in primary memory and controlled search from secondary memory.Psychological Review, 114, 104–132.
46.
UnsworthN.HeitzR.P.SchrockJ.C.EngleR.W. (2005). An automated version of the operation span task.Behavior Research Methods, 37, 498–505.
47.
UnsworthN.RedickT.S.HeitzR.P.BroadwayJ.EngleR.W. (2009). Complex working memory span tasks and higher-order cognition: A latent variable analysis of the relationship between processing and storage.Memory, 17, 635–654.
48.
UnsworthN.RedickT.S.LakeyC.E.YoungD.L. (2010). Lapses in sustained attention and their relation to executive and fluid abilities: An individual differences investigation.Intelligence, 38, 111–122.
49.
UnsworthN.SpillersG.J. (2010). Variation in working memory capacity and episodic recall: The contributions of strategic encoding and contextual retrieval.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 200–205.
50.
UnsworthN.SpillersG.J.BrewerG.A. (2011). Variation in verbal fluency: A latent variable analysis of switching, clustering, and overall performance.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 447–466.
51.
WatkinsM.J. (1979). Engrams as cuegrams and forgetting as cue overload: A cueing approach to the structure of memory.Memory organization and structure, PuffC. R.New York, NYAcademic Press173–195.
52.
WixtedJ.T.RohrerD. (1994). Analyzing the dynamics of free recall: An integrative review of the empirical literature.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 89–106.
