Complex span versus updating tasks of working memory: the gap is not that deep.

Center for Lifespan Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany.
Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition (Impact Factor: 2.92). 08/2009; 35(4):1089-96. DOI: 10.1037/a0015730
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT How to best measure working memory capacity is an issue of ongoing debate. Besides established complex span tasks, which combine short-term memory demands with generally unrelated secondary tasks, there exists a set of paradigms characterized by continuous and simultaneous updating of several items in working memory, such as the n-back, memory updating, or alpha span tasks. With a latent variable analysis (N = 96) based on content-heterogeneous operationalizations of both task families, the authors found a latent correlation between a complex span factor and an updating factor that was not statistically different from unity (r = .96). Moreover, both factors predicted fluid intelligence (reasoning) equally well. The authors conclude that updating tasks measure working memory equally well as complex span tasks. Processes involved in building, maintaining, and updating arbitrary bindings may constitute the common working memory ability underlying performance on reasoning, complex span, and updating tasks.

1 Bookmark
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) show preserved or mildly impaired working memory, despite their deficits in episodic memory. We aimed to identify performance and/or neural differences between aMCI patients and matched controls on a standard working memory fMRI task. Neuropsychological assessment demonstrated aMCI impairments in verbal and visual episodic long-term memory, with intact IQ and executive function. Participants completed a standard three-level N-back task where patients were unimpaired. Functional activations in the control group were found in expected areas, including the inferior parietal lobule and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Group differences were found in the insula and lingual gyrus and, in a region of interest analysis, in the hippocampus. In all cases, these were caused by an absence of task-related deactivations in the aMCI group. The results are consistent with reports of failure in task-related deacivations in aMCI and could be early indications of pathology.
    Aging Neuropsychology and Cognition 03/2014; · 1.07 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Working memory (WM) capacity is highly correlated with general cognitive ability and has proven to be an excellent predictor for academic success. Given that WM can be improved by training, our aim was to test whether WM training benefited academic abilities in elementary-school children. We examined 28 participants (mean age = 8.3 years, SD = 0.4) in a pretest-training-posttest-follow-up design. Over 14 training sessions, children either performed adaptive WM training (training group, n = 14) or nonadaptive low-level training (active control group, n = 14) on the same tasks. Pretest, posttest, and follow-up at 3 months after posttest included a neurocognitive test battery (WM, task switching, inhibition) and standardized tests for math and reading abilities. Adaptive WM training resulted in larger training gains than nonadaptive low-level training. The benefits induced by the adaptive training transferred to an untrained WM task and a standardized test for reading ability, but not to task switching, inhibition, or performance on a standardized math test. Transfer to the untrained WM task was maintained over 3 months. The analysis of individual differences revealed compensatory effects with larger gains in children with lower WM and reading scores at pretest. These training and transfer effects are discussed against the background of cognitive processing resulting from WM span training and the nature of the intervention.
    Child Neuropsychology 04/2014; · 2.24 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Findings on working memory (WM) and inhibition in children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are contradictory and earlier studies largely ignored individual differences. As WM and inhibition seem to be related, children who experience WM deficits might also experience inhibition deficits. Moreover, these children possibly form a distinct subgroup, differing on other variables, such as cognitive functioning, symptom severity, behavior, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) characteristics. We studied a large sample of children with and without ASD (8-12 years, IQ > 80) with classic experimental tasks (n-back task, ASD n = 77, control n = 45; stop task, ASD n = 74, control n = 43), and explored individual differences. The ASD group made more errors on the n-back task with increasing WM load, and had longer stop signal reaction times on the stop task when compared with controls. However, only 6 % of the ASD group showed both WM and inhibition deficits, and 71 % showed no deficits. Parents of children with WM and/or inhibition deficits tended to report more conduct problems on the disruptive behavior disorder rating scale. ADHD characteristics did not influence performance. Some children used medication during testing, which seemingly influenced stop task performance, but excluding these data did not change the main findings. Large individual differences in cognitive functioning are present, even within children with ASD with average or above average intelligence. However, whether individual differences in specific cognitive domains, such as WM and inhibition are as informative as individual differences in diagnosis, comorbidity, and general cognitive functioning, calls for future research.
    Journal of Neural Transmission 05/2014; · 3.05 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 26, 2014