Literature DB >> 16028576

Individual differences in working memory capacity and learning: evidence from the serial reaction time task.

Nash Unsworth1, Randall W Engle.   

Abstract

High and low working memory (WM) capacity individuals performed the serial reaction time task under both incidental and intentional learning conditions to determine the role of WM capacity in the learning of sequential information. WM capacity differences emerged in conditions of intentional but not incidental learning, indicating that individual differences in WM capacity occur in tasks requiring some form of control, with little difference appearing on tasks that required relatively automatic processing. Furthermore, an index of learning was significantly related to a measure of general fluid intelligence under intentional conditions only. Thus, the degree of learning was significantly related to higher order cognition, but only when intentional processing was emphasized.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16028576     DOI: 10.3758/bf03195310

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  16 in total

1.  Working memory, short-term memory, and general fluid intelligence: a latent-variable approach.

Authors:  Randall W Engle; Stephen W Tuholski; James E Laughlin; Andrew R A Conway
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1999-09

2.  The effect of memory load on negative priming: an individual differences investigation.

Authors:  A R Conway; S W Tuholski; R J Shisler; R W Engle
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1999-11

3.  When it does hurt to try: adult age differences in the effects of instructions on implicit pattern learning.

Authors:  D V Howard; J H Howard
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2001-12

4.  A controlled-attention view of working-memory capacity.

Authors:  M J Kane; M K Bleckley; A R Conway; R W Engle
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2001-06

5.  Working-memory capacity and the control of attention: the contributions of goal neglect, response competition, and task set to Stroop interference.

Authors:  Michael J Kane; Randall W Engle
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2003-03

Review 6.  A capacity theory of comprehension: individual differences in working memory.

Authors:  M A Just; P A Carpenter
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 8.934

7.  Working memory capacity and the antisaccade task: individual differences in voluntary saccade control.

Authors:  Nash Unsworth; Josef C Schrock; Randall W Engle
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 3.051

Review 8.  Implicit learning.

Authors:  C A Seger
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 17.737

9.  Effects of presentation rate and individual differences in short-term memory capacity on an indirect measure of serial learning.

Authors:  P A Frensch; C S Miner
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1994-01

10.  Working memory and retrieval: a resource-dependent inhibition model.

Authors:  A R Conway; R W Engle
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1994-12
View more
  37 in total

Review 1.  Modeling working memory: an interference model of complex span.

Authors:  Klaus Oberauer; Stephan Lewandowsky; Simon Farrell; Christopher Jarrold; Martin Greaves
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2012-10

2.  Implicit learning of fifth- and sixth-order sequential probabilities.

Authors:  Gilbert Remillard
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2010-10

3.  Adult age differences in learning on a sequentially cued prediction task.

Authors:  Kendra L Seaman; Darlene V Howard; James H Howard
Journal:  J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci       Date:  2013-06-26       Impact factor: 4.077

4.  Fluid intelligence and working memory support dissociable aspects of learning by physical but not observational practice.

Authors:  Dace Apšvalka; Emily S Cross; Richard Ramsey
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2019-05-14

5.  Testing enhances motor practice.

Authors:  Tobias Tempel; Christian Frings
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2019-10

Review 6.  A locus coeruleus-norepinephrine account of individual differences in working memory capacity and attention control.

Authors:  Nash Unsworth; Matthew K Robison
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2017-08

7.  Individual differences in implicit motor learning: task specificity in sensorimotor adaptation and sequence learning.

Authors:  Alit Stark-Inbar; Meher Raza; Jordan A Taylor; Richard B Ivry
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-11-02       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Dopamine D2 receptor density in the limbic striatum is related to implicit but not explicit movement sequence learning.

Authors:  Anke Karabanov; Simon Cervenka; Orjan de Manzano; Hans Forssberg; Lars Farde; Fredrik Ullén
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-04-05       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Evidence for parallel explicit and implicit sequence learning systems in older adults.

Authors:  Sunbin Song; Brynn Marks; James H Howard; Darlene V Howard
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2008-10-02       Impact factor: 3.332

10.  Implicit and explicit learning in individuals with agrammatic aphasia.

Authors:  Julia Schuchard; Cynthia K Thompson
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2014-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.