Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (2)
Document Type
- Article (2) (remove)
Language
- English (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2)
Keywords
- Working memory (2) (remove)
Institute
Recent studies of short-term serial order memory have suggested that the maintenance of order information does not involve domain-specific processes. We carried out two dual task experiments aimed at resolving several ambiguities in those studies. In our experiments, encoding and response of one serial reconstruction task was embedded within encoding and response of a concurrent serial reconstruction task. Order demands in both tasks were independently varied so as to find revealing patterns of interference between the two tasks. In Experiment 1, participants were to maintain and reconstruct the order of a list of verbal materials, while maintaining a list of spatial materials or vice-versa. Increasing the order demands in the outer reconstruction task resulted in small or non reliable performance decrements in the embedded reconstruction task. Experiment 2 sought to compare these results against two same-domain baseline conditions (two verbal lists or two spatial lists). In all conditions, increasing order demands in the outer task resulted in small or non-reliable performance decrements in the embedded task. However, performance in the embedded tasks was generally lower in the same-domain baseline conditions than in the cross-domain conditions. We argue that the main effect of domain in Experiment 2 indicates the contribution of domain-specific processes to short-term serial order maintenance. In addition, we interpret the failure to find consistent cross-list interference irrespective of domain as indicating the involvement of grouping mechanisms in concurrently performed serial order tasks. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
The present article reports four experiments that investigated the effects of task-unrelated thoughts (TUTs) on forgetting in non-verbal working memory. Participants had to remember three non-verbal stimuli over unfilled retention intervals (RIs) and then judge whether or not a subsequently presented probe stimulus matched one of the to-be-remembered stimuli. Participants additionally responded to randomly appearing probes that measured different aspects of their TUT engagement during the RI of the preceding trial. Forgetting over unfilled RIs was observed in three of four experiments and reliably associated with the proportion of time spent on TUTs. In contrast, the visual and auditory nature of the TUTs and the number of different TUTs did not reliably predict forgetting. The results support the view that TUTs block attention-based processes that are needed for restoring decaying memory representations rather than an alternative account in terms of interference caused by the content of the TUTs.