Literature DB >> 30148381

Working memory benchmarks-A missed opportunity: Comment on Oberauer et al. (2018).

André Vandierendonck1.   

Abstract

This commentary addresses a number of problems with the benchmarks proposed for evaluating theories of short-term and working memory (Oberauer et al., 2018). First, it is shown that the proposed benchmarks intentionally exclude findings regarding the core of the working memory construct and also miss some important findings from other subdomains. For these reasons, the benchmarks cannot be considered as a valid representation of the findings on short-term and working memory. Second, it is shown that although theory-neutrality of the benchmarks was aimed for, this goal was not achieved because theory-neutrality in the formulation of the benchmarks does not guarantee inclusion of all theory-dependent findings. For these reasons, the benchmarks miss their purpose and are defined in such a way as to encourage a future theory development that studies working memory in isolation from other cognitive activities and thus misses the opportunity to stimulate a better integrative understanding of working memory in the broader context of cognition. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30148381     DOI: 10.1037/bul0000159

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Bull        ISSN: 0033-2909            Impact factor:   17.737


  1 in total

1.  How Do Scientific Views Change? Notes From an Extended Adversarial Collaboration.

Authors:  Nelson Cowan; Clément Belletier; Jason M Doherty; Agnieszka J Jaroslawska; Stephen Rhodes; Alicia Forsberg; Moshe Naveh-Benjamin; Pierre Barrouillet; Valérie Camos; Robert H Logie
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2020-06-08
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.