Developmental Change in a Spatial Task of Attentional Capacity: An Essay Toward an Integration of Two Working Memory Models

Abstract

The objective of this paper is to illustrate the complementarity of two lines of studies on Working Memory, the neo-Piagetian models of Pascual-Leone and Case on the one hand, and Baddeley's model, on the other. After a brief summary of each model, their similarities and differences are reviewed. An empirical longitudinal study is then presented as an illustration. Four cohorts of children, aged 5, 6, 8, and 10 years on the first assessment, were examined once a year over five years, with a short-term memory task (Mr Peanut), asking for the recall of the location of coloured spots in a clown figure. Two versions were used: a unicoloured task (Peanut-P) and a multicoloured task (Peanut-C), in which subjects had to recall both positions and colours. Three aspects of the results are emphasised. First, it was found that performances in Peanut-C increased with item complexity up to a certain level, beyond which they tended to remain stable; this stability was interpreted as reflecting the limits in processing resources which are postulated by neo-Piagetian models. Secondly, a drastic diminution in the performances was observed on the fourth year, corresponding to a change in the way of responding: The task was computerised, and subjects had to answer, using a computer mouse. It is argued that the monitoring of the mouse disrupts performances because it draws on the same limited resources as the memory task. Finally, results showed that the monitoring of the mouse interferes more with the recall of positions than with the recall of colours, as could be expected if monitoring a computer mouse represents a spatial interference task. Methodological drawbacks of the studies are also discussed, and suggestions for further research indicated.

Cognitive demands of face monitoring: Evidence for visuospatial overload

“…Second, to compare the interference produced by monitoring a face with that produced by monitoring another secondary source of visuospatial information. The tasks used are visuospatial memory tasks known to tap VSSP: the Mr. Peanut task (De Ribaupierre & Bailleux, 1994) and the Corsi Block task (Corsi, 1972). These two different tasks tap different components of VSSP: Mr. Peanut, the visual component; Corsi block, the dynamic component (Pickering, Gathercole, Hall, & Lloyd, 2001).…”

Working memory and intraindividual variability in processing speed: A lifespan developmental and individual-differences study

“…These common mechanisms might therefore explain the close relationships that WM entertains with executive functions and with other broad cognitive functions, such as fluid intelligence (Gf). Neo-Piagetians, in particular Pascual-Leone, were precursors not in proposing the existence of a set of attentional processes labeled WM (e.g., Broadbent, 1958), but rather in suggesting that cognitive development is in large part explained by an increase in WM capacity (Case, 1978(Case, , 1985Case, Kurland, & Goldberg, 1982;Dasen & de Ribaupierre, 1987;de Ribaupierre, 1997;de Ribaupierre & Bailleux, 1994Pascual-Leone, 1970, 2011Pascual-Leone & Goodman, 1979;Pascual-Leone & Johnson, 2005). Among the neo-Piagetians, Pascual-Leone offered the most detailed account of how attentional capacity, as measured by WM tasks, is determined (e.g., Pascual-Leone, 1987).…”

The Development of Working Memory: Exploring the Complementarity of Two Models

“…They discussed a number of theoretical points of convergence and divergence between the two conceptual frameworks, some of which will be briefly summarised (for a detailed review, see de Ribaupierre and Bailleux, 1994). The present paper, however, is essentially of an empirical nature, rather than a theoretical one.…”

“…the visuo-spatial sketch pad, leaving less processing resources for recall. Due to its assumption of independent subsystems for verbal and visuo-spatial material, Baddeley's model was also more apt to interpret the finding that employment of the mouse device interfered more with the recall of positions than colours (for a detailed description of the results and a more elaborate discussion of the interpretation of the data within the two working memory models, see de Ribaupierre and Bailleux, 1994). This led the authors to conclude that the two models are complementary rather than contradictory.…”