@article{OberauerKliegl2006,
  author    = {Oberauer, Klaus and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {A formal model of capacity limits in working memory},
  series = {Journal of Memory and Language},
  volume    = {55},
  journal   = {Journal of Memory and Language},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Amsterdam},
  issn      = {0749-596X},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.jml.2006.08.009},
  pages     = {601 -- 626},
  year      = {2006},
  abstract  = {A mathematical model of working-memory capacity limits is proposed on the key assumption of mutual interference between items in working memory. Interference is assumed to arise from overwriting of features shared by these items. The model was fit to time-accuracy data of memory-updating tasks from four experiments using nonlinear mixed effect (NLME) models as a framework. The model gave a good account of the data from a numerical and a spatial task version. The performance pattern in a combination of numerical and spatial updating could be explained by variations in the interference parameter: assuming less feature overlap between contents from different domains than between contents from the same domain, the model can account for double dissociations of content domains in dual-task experiments. Experiment 3 extended this idea to similarity within the verbal domain. The decline of memory accuracy with increasing memory load was steeper with phonologically similar than with dissimilar material, although processing speed was faster for the similar material. The model captured the similarity effects with a higher estimated interference parameter for the similar than for the dissimilar condition. The results are difficult to explain with alternative models, in particular models incorporating time-based decay and models assuming limited resource pools.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{OberauerLange2009,
  author    = {Oberauer, Klaus and Lange, Elke B.},
  title     = {Activation and binding in verbal working memory : a dual-process model for the recognition of nonwords},
  issn      = {0010-0285},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.cogpsych.2008.05.003},
  year      = {2009},
  abstract  = {The article presents a mathematical model of short-term recognition based on dual-process models and the three- component theory of working memory [Oberauer, K. (2002). Access to information in working memory: Exploring the focus of attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 411-421]. Familiarity arises from activated representations in long-term memory, ignoring their relations; recollection retrieves bindings in the capacity- limited component of working memory. In three experiments participants encoded two short lists of nonwords for immediate recognition, one of which was then cued as irrelevant. Probes from the irrelevant list were rejected more slowly than new probes; this was also found with probes recombining letters of irrelevant nonwords, suggesting that familiarity arises from individual letters independent of their relations. When asked to accept probes whose letters were all in the relevant list, regardless of their conjunction, participants accepted probes preserving the original conjunctions faster than recombinations, showing that recollection accessed feature bindings automatically. The model fit the data best when familiarity depended only on matching letters, whereas recollection used binding information.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{GoetheOberauerKliegl2008,
  author    = {G{\"o}the, Katrin and Oberauer, Klaus and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {Age differences in dual-task performance after practice},
  issn      = {0882-7974},
  doi       = {10.1037/0882-7974.22.3.596},
  year      = {2008},
  abstract  = {This study investigated whether older adults could acquire the ability to perform 2 cognitive operations in parallel in a paradigm in which young adults had been shown to be able to do so (K. Oberauer \& R. Kliegl, 2004). Twelve young and 12 older adults practiced a numerical and a visuospatial continuous memory updating task in single-task and dual-task conditions for 16 to 24 sessions. After practice, 9 young adults were able to process the 2 tasks without dual- task costs, but none of the older adults had reached the criterion of parallel processing. The results suggest a qualitative difference between young and older adults in how they approach dual-task situations.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{OberauerWendlandKliegl2003,
  author    = {Oberauer, Klaus and Wendland, Mirko and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {Age differences in working memory : the roles of storage and selective access},
  year      = {2003},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{OberauerWilhelmRosas1999,
  author    = {Oberauer, Klaus and Wilhelm, Oliver and Rosas, D. R.},
  title     = {Bayesian rationality for the selection task? : a test of optimal data selection theory},
  year      = {1999},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{HoernigOberauerWeidenfeld2006,
  author    = {Hoernig, Robin and Oberauer, Klaus and Weidenfeld, Andrea},
  title     = {Between reasoning},
  series = {The quarterly journal of experimental psychology},
  volume    = {59},
  journal   = {The quarterly journal of experimental psychology},
  number    = {10},
  publisher = {SAGE Publishing},
  address   = {Thousand Oaks, CA},
  issn      = {1747-0218},
  doi       = {10.1080/17470210500416151},
  pages     = {1805 -- 1825},
  year      = {2006},
  abstract  = {In two experiments we investigated three-term reasoning with spatial relational assertions using the preposition between as compared to projective prepositions (such as to the left of). For each kind of assertion we distinguish the referent expression (i.e., the grammatical subject) from the relatum expression (i.e., the internal argument of the preposition; e.g., [The hedgehog](referent)_(expression) is to the left of [the frog](relatum)_(expression); [the snake](referent)_(expression) is between [the donkey and the deer](relatum)_(expression)). Previous research has shown that integrating premises with projective prepositions is easier (a) when the relatum expression of the second premise denotes an element already given by the first premise (relatum = given), and (b) when the term denoting a given element precedes the term denoting a new element (given - new). Experiment 1 extended this finding to second premises with the preposition between. In Experiment 2, between figured in the first premise. In this case, participants built an initial preferred model already from the first premise, although such a premise is indeterminate with respect to the array that it describes. Since there is no need left for integrating the second premise, this premise is instead used to verify the initial model and to modify it when necessary. A further investigation of conclusion evaluation times showed that conclusions were evaluated faster when they first mentioned the element that was included most recently into the mental model of the premises. The use of premises with between permitted the separation of recency of model inclusion from recency of appearance of an element in a premise.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{OberauerKliegl2001,
  author    = {Oberauer, Klaus and Kliegl, Reinhold},
  title     = {Beyond resources : formal models of complexity effects in age differences in working memory},
  year      = {2001},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Oberauer2005,
  author    = {Oberauer, Klaus},
  title     = {Binding and inhibition in working memory : individual and age differences in short-term recognition},
  issn      = {0096-3445},
  year      = {2005},
  abstract  = {Two studies investigated the relationship between working memory capacity (WMC), adult age, and the resolution of conflict between familiarity and recollection in short-term recognition tasks. Experiment 1 showed a specific deficit of young adults with low WMC in rejecting intrusion probes (i.e., highly familiar probes) in a modified Sternberg task, which was similar to the deficit found in old adults in a parallel experiment (K. Oberauer, 2001). Experiment 2 generalized these results to 3 recognition paradigms (modified Sternberg, local recognition, and n back tasks). Old adults showed disproportional performance deficits on intrusion probes only in terms of reaction times, whereas young adults with low WMC showed them only in terms of errors. The generality of the effect across paradigms is more compatible with a deficit in content-context bindings subserving recollection than with a deficit in inhibition of irrelevant information in working memory. Structural equation models showed that WMC is related to the efficiency of recollection but not of familiarity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2005 APA, all rights reserved)},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{WeidenfeldOberauerHornig2005,
  author    = {Weidenfeld, Andrea and Oberauer, Klaus and Hornig, R},
  title     = {Causal and noncausal conditionals : an integrated model of interpretation and reasoning},
  year      = {2005},
  abstract  = {We present an integrated model for the understanding of and the reasoning from conditional statements. Central assumptions from several approaches are integrated into a causal path model. According to the model, the cognitive availability of exceptions to a conditional reduces the subjective conditional probability of the consequent, given the antecedent. This conditional probability determines people's degree of belief in the conditional, which in turn affects their willingness to accept logically valid inferences. In addition to this indirect pathway, the model contains a direct pathway: Availability of exceptional situations directly reduces the endorsement of valid inferences. We tested the integrated model with three experiments using conditional statements embedded in pseudonaturalistic cover stories. An explicitly mentioned causal link between antecedent and consequent was either present (causal conditionals) or absent (arbitrary conditionals). The model was supported for the causal but not for the arbitrary conditional statements},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Oberauer2005,
  author    = {Oberauer, Klaus},
  title     = {Control of the contents of working memory : a comparison of two paradigms and two age groups},
  issn      = {0278-7393},
  year      = {2005},
  abstract  = {Two experiments investigated whether young and old adults can temporarily remove information from a capacity- limited central component of working memory (WM) into another component, the activated part of long-term memory (LTM). Experiment I used a modified Sternberg recognition task (S. Sternberg, 1969); Experiment 2 used an arithmetic memory- updating task. In both paradigms, participants memorized 2 lists, one of which was cued as temporarily irrelevant. Removal of the irrelevant list from capacity-limited WM was indexed by the disappearance of list-length effects of that list on latencies for concurrent processing tasks. Young adults could oursource the irrelevant list within 2-3 s and retrieve it back into the central part of WM later. Old adults showed the same flexibility in the arithmetic updating task but seemed somewhat less able or inclined to temporarily move information into the activated part of LTM in the modified Sternberg task},
  language  = {en}
}