Similarities and Differences Between Working Memory and Long-term Memory: Evidence from the Levels-of-processing Span Task

Overview

Journal J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn

Publisher American Psychological Association

Specialty Psychology

Date 2010 Mar 3

PMID 20192543

Citations 17

Authors

Nathan S Rose

Joel Myerson

Henry L Roediger

Sandra Hale

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Two experiments compared the effects of depth of processing on working memory (WM) and long-term memory (LTM) using a levels-of-processing (LOP) span task, a newly developed WM span procedure that involves processing to-be-remembered words based on their visual, phonological, or semantic characteristics. Depth of processing had minimal effect on WM tests, yet subsequent memory for the same items on delayed tests showed the typical benefits of semantic processing. Although the difference in LOP effects demonstrates a dissociation between WM and LTM, we also found that the retrieval practice provided by recalling words on the WM task benefited long-term retention, especially for words initially recalled from supraspan lists. The latter result is consistent with the hypothesis that WM span tasks involve retrieval from secondary memory, but the LOP dissociation suggests the processes engaged by WM and LTM tests may differ. Therefore, similarities and differences between WM and LTM depend on the extent to which retrieval from secondary memory is involved and whether there is a match (or mismatch) between initial processing and subsequent retrieval, consistent with transfer-appropriate-processing theory.

Citing Articles

Does the extension of free time trigger spontaneous elaborative strategies in working memory?.

Leproult I, Lemaire B, Portrat S Mem Cognit. 2024; 52(8):2022-2052.

PMID: 39133437 DOI: 10.3758/s13421-024-01615-7.

Short-term retention of words as a function of encoding depth.

Lawrence C, Guitard D, Cowan N Mem Cognit. 2024; 52(6):1338-1356.

PMID: 38472619 DOI: 10.3758/s13421-024-01546-3.

Demands on perceptual and mnemonic fidelity are a key determinant of age-related cognitive decline throughout the lifespan.

Gellersen H, McMaster J, Abdurahman A, Simons J J Exp Psychol Gen. 2024; 153(1):200-223.

PMID: 38236240 PMC: 10795485. DOI: 10.1037/xge0001476.

Boundary conditions for observing cognitive load effects in visual working memory.

Ricker T, Vergauwe E Mem Cognit. 2022; 50(6):1169-1185.

PMID: 35505223 DOI: 10.3758/s13421-022-01320-3.

Individual differences in working memory capacity moderate effects of post-learning activity on memory consolidation over the long term.

Martini M, Marhenke R, Martini C, Rossi S, Sachse P Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1):17976.

PMID: 33087750 PMC: 7578020. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-74760-z.

References

Kane M, Hambrick D, Tuholski S, Wilhelm O, Payne T, Engle R . The generality of working memory capacity: a latent-variable approach to verbal and visuospatial memory span and reasoning. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2004; 133(2):189-217. DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.133.2.189. View

Roediger 3rd H, Gallo D, Geraci L . Processing approaches to cognition: the impetus from the levels-of-processing framework. Memory. 2002; 10(5-6):319-32. DOI: 10.1080/09658210224000144. View

Oberauer K . Access to information in working memory: exploring the focus of attention. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2002; 28(3):411-21. View

Karpicke J, Roediger 3rd H . Expanding retrieval practice promotes short-term retention, but equally spaced retrieval enhances long-term retention. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2007; 33(4):704-19. DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.704. View

Baddeley A . Short-term memory for word sequences as a function of acoustic, semantic and formal similarity. Q J Exp Psychol. 1966; 18(4):362-5. DOI: 10.1080/14640746608400055. View

Shallice T, Warrington E . Independent functioning of verbal memory stores: a neuropsychological study. Q J Exp Psychol. 1970; 22(2):261-73. DOI: 10.1080/00335557043000203. View

Stadthagen-Gonzalez H, Davis C . The Bristol norms for age of acquisition, imageability, and familiarity. Behav Res Methods. 2007; 38(4):598-605. DOI: 10.3758/bf03193891. View

Nelson D, McEvoy C, Schreiber T . The University of South Florida free association, rhyme, and word fragment norms. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 2005; 36(3):402-7. DOI: 10.3758/bf03195588. View

Unsworth N . Examining variation in working memory capacity and retrieval in cued recall. Memory. 2009; 17(4):386-96. DOI: 10.1080/09658210902802959. View

10.

WAUGH N, Norman D . PRIMARY MEMORY. Psychol Rev. 1965; 72:89-104. DOI: 10.1037/h0021797. View

11.

Unsworth N, Engle R . The nature of individual differences in working memory capacity: active maintenance in primary memory and controlled search from secondary memory. Psychol Rev. 2007; 114(1):104-32. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.114.1.104. View

12.

Unsworth N, Engle R . On the division of short-term and working memory: an examination of simple and complex span and their relation to higher order abilities. Psychol Bull. 2007; 133(6):1038-66. DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.133.6.1038. View

13.

Tanenhaus M, Seidenberg M . Multiple code activation in word recognition: evidence from rhyme monitoring. J Exp Psychol Hum Learn. 1981; 7(3):170-80. View

14.

Engle R, Tuholski S, Laughlin J, Conway A . Working memory, short-term memory, and general fluid intelligence: a latent-variable approach. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1999; 128(3):309-331. DOI: 10.1037//0096-3445.128.3.309. View

15.

McCabe D . The Role of Covert Retrieval in Working Memory Span Tasks: Evidence from Delayed Recall Tests. J Mem Lang. 2011; 58(2):480-494. PMC: 2715014. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.04.004. View

16.

Baddeley . The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory?. Trends Cogn Sci. 2000; 4(11):417-423. DOI: 10.1016/s1364-6613(00)01538-2. View

17.

Roediger H, Karpicke J . Test-enhanced learning: taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychol Sci. 2006; 17(3):249-55. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x. View

18.

Just M, Carpenter P, KELLER T . The capacity theory of comprehension: new frontiers of evidence and arguments. Psychol Rev. 1996; 103(4):773-80. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295x.103.4.773. View

19.

Carrier M, Pashler H . The influence of retrieval on retention. Mem Cognit. 1992; 20(6):633-42. DOI: 10.3758/bf03202713. View

20.

Baddeley A . The influence of acoustic and semantic similarity on long-term memory for word sequences. Q J Exp Psychol. 1966; 18(4):302-9. DOI: 10.1080/14640746608400047. View