Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

How does running memory span work?

Michael Bunting1, Nelson Cowan, J Scott Saults

  • 1University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA. mbunting@casl.umd.edu

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (2006)
|September 2, 2006
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Toward a comprehensive account of verbal memory: An embedded computational model across representational domains.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same author

Cue-driven attentional guidance nearly eliminates salience effects in working memory.

Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
Same author

Long-term representational costs of overloading working memory.

Psychonomic bulletin & review·2026
Same author

Quality Matters: Linking Patterns of Care to Ovarian Cancer Survival in a National Gynae-Oncology Registry.

JCO oncology practice·2026
Same author

Colors, characters, locations, and shapes: The capacity of working memory for multiple, dissimilar sets of items.

Memory & cognition·2026
Same author

Multilab Direct Replication of Flavell, Beach, and Chinsky (1966): Spontaneous Verbal Rehearsal in a Memory Task as a Function of Age.

Advances in methods and practices in psychological science·2025
Same journal

EXPRESS: Age-related Differences in Recognition Memory for Discourse: The Case of Modified Words, Competitors, and Related Lures.

Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)·2026
Same journal

EXPRESS: Exaggerated Self-Referencing in Body Dysmorphic Disorder.

Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)·2026
Same journal

EXPRESS: Post-Error Adjustments: The role of Response Stimulus Intervals and error placement.

Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)·2026
Same journal

Mitigating the Low Prevalence Effect: Role of Removing Explicit "Target-Absent" Responses in Visual Search.

Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)·2026
Same journal

Visual Selection Is Spatially Constrained During Working Memory Consolidation.

Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)·2026
Same journal

Cross-Phoneme Generalisation of Dimension-Based Statistical Learning for Stop Voicing: Probing Subject Design and Word Frame Effects.

Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)·2026
See all related articles

Running memory span tasks involve recalling items from unpredictable lists. This study identifies two distinct strategies: passive holding and active rehearsal, exploring their roles and interference effects.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Neuroscience
  • Human Memory

Background:

  • Running memory span tasks are crucial for understanding memory recall.
  • These tasks involve recalling recent items from a continuously presented list.
  • Previous research has not fully distinguished between different cognitive strategies used.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate two distinct strategies in running memory span tasks.
  • To examine the role of passive holding versus active rehearsal.
  • To understand the impact of interference on these memory strategies.

Main Methods:

  • Two experiments were conducted to analyze running memory span performance.
  • Participants performed tasks designed to elicit either a low-effort or high-effort strategy.

Related Experiment Videos

  • The effects of two types of interference were systematically introduced.

    • Main Results:

    • Evidence suggests distinct behavioral patterns for passive holding and active rehearsal strategies.
    • Interference differentially affected performance depending on the strategy employed.
    • The findings highlight the adaptive nature of memory strategies in response to task demands.

    Conclusions:

    • Running memory span performance is influenced by the strategic approach adopted by individuals.
    • Understanding these strategies is key to explaining variability in memory recall.
    • Future research should consider these distinct strategies when designing memory experiments.