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

Working memory and retrieval: a resource-dependent inhibition model

A R Conway1, R W Engle

  • 1Department of Psychology, University of South Carolina, Columbia 29208.

Journal of Experimental Psychology. General
|December 1, 1994
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

Dissociable brain mechanisms for inhibitory control: effects of interference content and working memory capacity.

Brain research. Cognitive brain research·2003
Same author

The cocktail party phenomenon revisited: the importance of working memory capacity.

Psychonomic bulletin & review·2001
Same author

A controlled-attention view of working-memory capacity.

Journal of experimental psychology. General·2001
Same author

Individual differences in working memory capacity and enumeration.

Memory & cognition·2001
Same author

Sequence and analysis of chromosome 1 of the plant Arabidopsis thaliana.

Nature·2000
Same author

The core meiotic transcriptome in budding yeasts.

Nature genetics·2000

Working memory (WM) capacity differences impact retrieval from primary memory, especially with interference. This suggests WM aids effortful search, not automatic recall.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Neuroscience
  • Human Memory

Background:

  • Individual differences in working memory (WM) capacity are well-documented.
  • Understanding how WM capacity influences memory retrieval processes is crucial for cognitive models.
  • Distinguishing between primary and secondary memory retrieval mechanisms offers insights into memory organization.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the relationship between individual differences in working memory (WM) capacity and retrieval performance from primary and secondary memory.
  • To determine the conditions under which WM capacity differences affect memory retrieval.
  • To explore the role of controlled effortful search versus automatic activation in memory retrieval.

Main Methods:

  • Four experiments were conducted to assess working memory (WM) capacity and its effect on retrieval from primary and secondary memory.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Tasks were designed to induce interference or response competition to probe WM-dependent retrieval.
  • Retrieval from primary and secondary memory was compared across varying set sizes.

    • Main Results:

    • Working memory (WM) capacity differences were observed solely in primary memory retrieval, specifically under conditions of interference or response competition.
    • Retrieval from primary memory was dependent on set size.
    • For sets exceeding two items, retrieval from secondary memory was independent of set size, suggesting automatic activation processes.

    Conclusions:

    • Working memory (WM) capacity is critical for effortful, controlled search processes but not for automatic activation-based retrieval.
    • Individual differences in attentional resources may underlie variations in the ability to inhibit irrelevant information during memory retrieval.
    • Primary memory retrieval is sensitive to set size and interference, while secondary memory retrieval relies on different mechanisms for larger sets.