The Experts below are selected from a list of 21402 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Randall W Engle - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence maintenance and disengagement
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2016Co-Authors: Zach Shipstead, Tyler L. Harrison, Randall W EngleAbstract:Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence have been demonstrated to be strongly correlated traits. Typically, high Working Memory Capacity is believed to facilitate reasoning through accurate maintenance of relevant information. In this article, we present a proposal reframing this issue, such that tests of Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence are seen as measuring complementary processes that facilitate complex cognition. Respectively, these are the ability to maintain access to critical information and the ability to disengage from or block outdated information. In the realm of problem solving, high Working Memory Capacity allows a person to represent and maintain a problem accurately and stably, so that hypothesis testing can be conducted. However, as hypotheses are disproven or become untenable, disengaging from outdated problem solving attempts becomes important so that new hypotheses can be generated and tested. From this perspective, the strong correlation between Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence is due not to one ability having a causal influence on the other but to separate attention-demanding mental functions that can be contrary to one another but are organized around top-down processing goals.
-
Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence maintenance and disengagement
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2016Co-Authors: Zach Shipstead, Tyler L. Harrison, Randall W EngleAbstract:Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence have been demonstrated to be strongly correlated traits. Typically, high Working Memory Capacity is believed to facilitate reasoning through accurate ...
-
wonderlic Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence
Intelligence, 2015Co-Authors: Kenny L Hicks, Tyle L Harriso, Randall W EngleAbstract:Abstract Despite the widespread popularity of the Wonderlic Personnel Test, evidence of its validity as a measure of intelligence and personnel selection is limited. The present study sought to better understand the Wonderlic by investigating its relationship to multiple measures of Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence. Our results show that Wonderlic has no direct relationship to fluid intelligence once its commonality to Working Memory Capacity is accounted for. Further, we found that the Wonderlic was a significant predictor of Working Memory Capacity for subjects with low fluid intelligence, but failed to discriminate as well among subjects with high fluid intelligence. These results suggest that the predictive power of the Wonderlic could depend on the characteristics of the sample it is administered to, whereas the relationship between fluid intelligence and Working Memory Capacity is robust and invariant to the cognitive capabilities of the sample.
-
Why is Working Memory Capacity related to matrix reasoning tasks
Memory & cognition, 2014Co-Authors: Tyler L. Harrison, Zach Shipstead, Randall W EngleAbstract:One of the reasons why Working Memory Capacity is so widely researched is its substantial relationship with fluid intelligence. Although this relationship has been found in numerous studies, researchers have been unable to provide a conclusive answer as to why the two constructs are related. In a recent study, researchers examined which attributes of Raven’s Progressive Matrices were most strongly linked with Working Memory Capacity (Wiley, Jarosz, Cushen, & Colflesh, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 256–263, 2011). In that study, Raven’s problems that required a novel combination of rules to solve were more strongly correlated with Working Memory Capacity than were problems that did not. In the present study, we wanted to conceptually replicate the Wiley et al. results while controlling for a few potential confounds. Thus, we experimentally manipulated whether a problem required a novel combination of rules and found that repeated-rule-combination problems were more strongly related to Working Memory Capacity than were novel-rule-combination problems. The relationship to other measures of fluid intelligence did not change based on whether the problem required a novel rule combination.
-
the mechanisms of Working Memory Capacity primary Memory secondary Memory and attention control
Journal of Memory and Language, 2014Co-Authors: Zach Shipstead, Dakota R B Lindsey, Robyn L Marshall, Randall W EngleAbstract:Working Memory Capacity is traditionally treated as a unitary construct that can be explained using one cognitive mechanism (e.g., storage, attention control). Several recent studies have, however, demonstrated that multiple mechanisms are needed to explain individual differences in Working Memory Capacity. The present study focuses on three such mechanisms: Maintenance/disengagement in primary Memory, retrieval from sec- ondary Memory, and attention control. Structural equation modeling reveals that each of these mechanisms is important to explaining individual differences in Working Memory Capacity. Further analyses reveal that the degree to which these mechanisms are apparent may be driven by the type of task used to operationalize Working Memory Capacity. Spe- cifically, complex span (processing and storage) and visual arrays (change detection) per- formance is strongly related to a person's attention control, while running Memory span (Memory for last n items on a list) performance has a relationship to primary Memory that is apparent above-and-beyond other Working Memory tasks. Finally, regardless of the Working Memory task that is used, it is found that primary and secondary Memory fully explain the relationship of Working Memory Capacity to general fluid intelligence.
Nash Unsworth - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
faster smarter Working Memory Capacity and perceptual speed in relation to fluid intelligence
Journal of cognitive psychology, 2012Co-Authors: Thomas S Redick, Nash Unsworth, Andrew J Kelly, Randall W EngleAbstract:Numerous studies have found that Working Memory Capacity and perceptual speed predict variation in fluid intelligence. Within the cognitive ageing literature, perceptual speed accounts for substantial ageing variance in Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence. However, within young adults, the interrelationships among these three abilities are less clear. The current work investigated these relationships via confirmatory factor analyses and structural equation modelling using tasks with verbal, spatial, and numerical content. The results indicate that Working Memory Capacity and perceptual speed were not related in a large, cognitively diverse sample of young adults. However, both Working Memory Capacity and perceptual speed accounted for unique variance in fluid intelligence. The results are discussed in relation to previous research with young and older adults.
-
Working Memory Capacity and retrieval limitations from long-term Memory: An examination of differences in accessibility:
Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2012Co-Authors: Nash Unsworth, Gregory J. Spillers, Gene A. BrewerAbstract: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 smal...
-
measuring Working Memory Capacity with automated complex span tasks
European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 2012Co-Authors: Thomas S Redick, Nash Unsworth, James M Broadway, Matt E Meier, Princy S Kuriakose, Michael J Kane, Randall W EngleAbstract:Individual differences in Working Memory Capacity are related to a variety of behaviors both within and outside of the lab. Recently developed automated complex span tasks have contributed to increasing our knowledge concerning Working Memory Capacity by making valid and reliable assessments freely available for use by researchers. Combining the samples from three testing locations yielded data from over 6,000 young adult participants who performed at least one of three such tasks (Operation, Symmetry, and Reading Span). Normative data are presented here for researchers interested in applying cutoffs for their own applications, and information on the validity and reliability of the tasks is also reported. In addition, the data were analyzed as a function of sex and college status. While automated complex span tasks are just one way to measure Working Memory Capacity, the use of a standardized procedure for adminis- tration and scoring greatly facilitates comparison across studies.
-
Variation in Working Memory Capacity and temporal-contextual retrieval from episodic Memory.
Journal of experimental psychology. Learning memory and cognition, 2011Co-Authors: Gregory J. Spillers, Nash UnsworthAbstract:Unsworth and Engle (2007) recently proposed a model of Working Memory Capacity characterized by, among other things, the ability to conduct a strategic, cue-dependent search of long-term Memory. Although this ability has been found to mediate individual variation in a number of higher order cognitive tasks, the component processes involved remain unclear. The current study was designed to investigate individual variation in successfully retrieving information from episodic Memory by examining various aspects of the retrieval process. Both high- and low-Working Memory Capacity participants were found to initiate recall in a similar fashion; however, low-Working Memory Capacity participants did not show the classic asymmetry in their conditional-response probabilities that is typically observed. Overall, the retrieval deficits observed in low-Working Memory Capacity individuals appear to be rooted in their inability to use the products of retrieval to further aid their search.
-
There’s more to the Working Memory Capacity—fluid intelligence relationship than just secondary Memory
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2009Co-Authors: Nash Unsworth, Gene A. Brewer, Gregory J. SpillersAbstract:The present study examined the claim that secondary Memory processes account for the correlation between Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence via a latent variable analysis. In the present study, participants performed multiple measures of secondary Memory, Working Memory Capacity, and fluid intelligence. Structural equation modeling suggested that both secondary Memory and Working Memory Capacity account for unique variance in fluid intelligence. These results are inconsistent with recent claims that Working Memory Capacity does not account for variance in fluid intelligence over and above what is accounted for by secondary Memory. Rather, the results are consistent with models of Working Memory Capacity that suggest that both maintenance and retrieval processes are needed to account for the substantial relation between Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence.
Gregory J. Spillers - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Working Memory Capacity and retrieval limitations from long-term Memory: An examination of differences in accessibility:
Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2012Co-Authors: Nash Unsworth, Gregory J. Spillers, Gene A. BrewerAbstract: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 smal...
-
Variation in Working Memory Capacity and temporal-contextual retrieval from episodic Memory.
Journal of experimental psychology. Learning memory and cognition, 2011Co-Authors: Gregory J. Spillers, Nash UnsworthAbstract:Unsworth and Engle (2007) recently proposed a model of Working Memory Capacity characterized by, among other things, the ability to conduct a strategic, cue-dependent search of long-term Memory. Although this ability has been found to mediate individual variation in a number of higher order cognitive tasks, the component processes involved remain unclear. The current study was designed to investigate individual variation in successfully retrieving information from episodic Memory by examining various aspects of the retrieval process. Both high- and low-Working Memory Capacity participants were found to initiate recall in a similar fashion; however, low-Working Memory Capacity participants did not show the classic asymmetry in their conditional-response probabilities that is typically observed. Overall, the retrieval deficits observed in low-Working Memory Capacity individuals appear to be rooted in their inability to use the products of retrieval to further aid their search.
-
There’s more to the Working Memory Capacity—fluid intelligence relationship than just secondary Memory
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2009Co-Authors: Nash Unsworth, Gene A. Brewer, Gregory J. SpillersAbstract:The present study examined the claim that secondary Memory processes account for the correlation between Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence via a latent variable analysis. In the present study, participants performed multiple measures of secondary Memory, Working Memory Capacity, and fluid intelligence. Structural equation modeling suggested that both secondary Memory and Working Memory Capacity account for unique variance in fluid intelligence. These results are inconsistent with recent claims that Working Memory Capacity does not account for variance in fluid intelligence over and above what is accounted for by secondary Memory. Rather, the results are consistent with models of Working Memory Capacity that suggest that both maintenance and retrieval processes are needed to account for the substantial relation between Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence.
-
there s more to the Working Memory Capacity fluid intelligence relationship than just secondary Memory
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2009Co-Authors: Nash Unsworth, Gene A Ewe, Gregory J. SpillersAbstract:The present study examined the claim that secondary Memory processes account for the correlation between Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence via a latent variable analysis. In the present study, participants performed multiple measures of secondary Memory, Working Memory Capacity, and fluid intelligence. Structural equation modeling suggested that both secondary Memory and Working Memory Capacity account for unique variance in fluid intelligence. These results are inconsistent with recent claims that Working Memory Capacity does not account for variance in fluid intelligence over and above what is accounted for by secondary Memory. Rather, the results are consistent with models of Working Memory Capacity that suggest that both maintenance and retrieval processes are needed to account for the substantial relation between Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence.
Zach Shipstead - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence maintenance and disengagement
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2016Co-Authors: Zach Shipstead, Tyler L. Harrison, Randall W EngleAbstract:Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence have been demonstrated to be strongly correlated traits. Typically, high Working Memory Capacity is believed to facilitate reasoning through accurate ...
-
Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence maintenance and disengagement
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2016Co-Authors: Zach Shipstead, Tyler L. Harrison, Randall W EngleAbstract:Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence have been demonstrated to be strongly correlated traits. Typically, high Working Memory Capacity is believed to facilitate reasoning through accurate maintenance of relevant information. In this article, we present a proposal reframing this issue, such that tests of Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence are seen as measuring complementary processes that facilitate complex cognition. Respectively, these are the ability to maintain access to critical information and the ability to disengage from or block outdated information. In the realm of problem solving, high Working Memory Capacity allows a person to represent and maintain a problem accurately and stably, so that hypothesis testing can be conducted. However, as hypotheses are disproven or become untenable, disengaging from outdated problem solving attempts becomes important so that new hypotheses can be generated and tested. From this perspective, the strong correlation between Working Memory Capacity and fluid intelligence is due not to one ability having a causal influence on the other but to separate attention-demanding mental functions that can be contrary to one another but are organized around top-down processing goals.
-
Why is Working Memory Capacity related to matrix reasoning tasks
Memory & cognition, 2014Co-Authors: Tyler L. Harrison, Zach Shipstead, Randall W EngleAbstract:One of the reasons why Working Memory Capacity is so widely researched is its substantial relationship with fluid intelligence. Although this relationship has been found in numerous studies, researchers have been unable to provide a conclusive answer as to why the two constructs are related. In a recent study, researchers examined which attributes of Raven’s Progressive Matrices were most strongly linked with Working Memory Capacity (Wiley, Jarosz, Cushen, & Colflesh, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 256–263, 2011). In that study, Raven’s problems that required a novel combination of rules to solve were more strongly correlated with Working Memory Capacity than were problems that did not. In the present study, we wanted to conceptually replicate the Wiley et al. results while controlling for a few potential confounds. Thus, we experimentally manipulated whether a problem required a novel combination of rules and found that repeated-rule-combination problems were more strongly related to Working Memory Capacity than were novel-rule-combination problems. The relationship to other measures of fluid intelligence did not change based on whether the problem required a novel rule combination.
-
the mechanisms of Working Memory Capacity primary Memory secondary Memory and attention control
Journal of Memory and Language, 2014Co-Authors: Zach Shipstead, Dakota R B Lindsey, Robyn L Marshall, Randall W EngleAbstract:Working Memory Capacity is traditionally treated as a unitary construct that can be explained using one cognitive mechanism (e.g., storage, attention control). Several recent studies have, however, demonstrated that multiple mechanisms are needed to explain individual differences in Working Memory Capacity. The present study focuses on three such mechanisms: Maintenance/disengagement in primary Memory, retrieval from sec- ondary Memory, and attention control. Structural equation modeling reveals that each of these mechanisms is important to explaining individual differences in Working Memory Capacity. Further analyses reveal that the degree to which these mechanisms are apparent may be driven by the type of task used to operationalize Working Memory Capacity. Spe- cifically, complex span (processing and storage) and visual arrays (change detection) per- formance is strongly related to a person's attention control, while running Memory span (Memory for last n items on a list) performance has a relationship to primary Memory that is apparent above-and-beyond other Working Memory tasks. Finally, regardless of the Working Memory task that is used, it is found that primary and secondary Memory fully explain the relationship of Working Memory Capacity to general fluid intelligence.
-
Working Memory training may increase Working Memory Capacity but not fluid intelligence
Psychological Science, 2013Co-Authors: Tyle L Harriso, Kenny L Hicks, Zach Shipstead, Thomas S Redick, David Z Hambrick, Randall W EngleAbstract:Working Memory is a critical element of complex cognition, particularly under conditions of distraction and interference. Measures of Working Memory Capacity correlate positively with many measures of real-world cognition, including fluid intelligence. There have been numerous attempts to use training procedures to increase Working Memory Capacity and thereby performance on the real-world tasks that rely on Working Memory Capacity. In the study reported here, we demonstrated that training on complex Working Memory span tasks leads to improvement on similar tasks with different materials but that such training does not generalize to measures of fluid intelligence.
Joshua K. Hartshorne - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Visual Working Memory Capacity and proactive interference.
PloS one, 2008Co-Authors: Joshua K. HartshorneAbstract:Background: Visual Working Memory Capacity is extremely limited and appears to be relatively immune to practice effects or the use of explicit strategies. The recent discovery that visual Working Memory tasks, like verbal Working Memory tasks, are subject to proactive interference, coupled with the fact that typical visual Working Memory tasks are particularly conducive to proactive interference, suggests that visual Working Memory Capacity may be systematically under-estimated. Methodology/Principal Findings: Working Memory Capacity was probed behaviorally in adult humans both in laboratory settings and via the Internet. Several experiments show that although the effect of proactive interference on visual Working Memory is significant and can last over several trials, it only changes the Capacity estimate by about 15%. Conclusions/Significance: This study further confirms the sharp limitations on visual Working Memory Capacity, both in absolute terms and relative to verbal Working Memory. It is suggested that future research take these limitations into account in understanding differences across a variety of tasks between human adults, prelinguistic infants and nonlinguistic animals.
