Further evidence for temporal decay in working memory: Reply to Lewandowsky and Oberauer (2009).

Abstract

The sources of forgetting in working memory (WM) are a matter of intense debate: Is there a time-related decay of memory traces, or is forgetting uniquely due to representation-based interference? In a previous study, we claimed to have provided evidence supporting the temporal decay hypothesis (S. Portrat, P. Barrouillet, & V. Camos, 2008). However, reanalyzing our data, S. Lewandowsky and K. Oberauer (2009) demonstrated that they do not provide compelling evidence for temporal decay and suggested a class of alternative models favoring a representation-based interference account. In this article, we develop from the most recent proposals made by Lewandowsky and Oberauer 2 of the most plausible extensions of these alternative models. We show that neither of these extensions can account for recent findings related to between-domain WM performance and that both lead to predictions that are contradicted by new empirical evidence. Finally, we show that recent studies that have been claimed to rule out the temporal decay hypothesis do not resist close scrutiny. We conclude that the time-based resource-sharing model remains the most parsimonious way to account for forgetting and restoration of memory traces in WM.

Time causes forgetting from working memory

“…The total absence of an interaction between the format of the intervening task (either words or digits) and the nature of the memoranda (either letters or spatial locations) supports the hypothesis that memory traces, whatever their nature, suffer from a temporal decay as long as attention is diverted by concurrent activities, as is assumed by the TBRS model of working memory (Barrouillet et al, 2004(Barrouillet et al, , 2007Vergauwe et al, 2009;Vergauwe et al, 2010). Our findings also mesh with and extend recent empirical findings suggesting that at least some features of memory traces decay with time (Barrouillet, Portrat, Vergauwe, Diependaele, & Camos, 2011;Cowan & AuBuchon, 2008;Ricker & Cowan, 2010).…”

Le développement de la mémoire de travail : perspectives dans le cadre du modèle de partage temporel des ressources

“…La troisième hypothèse est que les traces mémorielles sur lesquelles l'attention se concentre reç oivent de l'activation, mais, dès que l'attention est déplacée, cette activation souffre d'une dégrada-tion liée au temps Barrouillet, Portrat, Vergauwe, Diependaele, & Camos, 2011 ;Barrouillet, De Paepe, & Langerock, 2012 ;Cowan, 1995Cowan, , 1999Portrat, Barrouillet, & Camos, 2008 ;Towse & Hitch, 1995). Par conséquent, dans les tâches d'empan complexe mais aussi dans le fonctionnement de la mémoire de travail en général, les traces mnésiques doivent être activement maintenues avant de disparaître lorsque l'attention est occupée par un traitement.…”

Decay uncovered in nonverbal short-term memory

“…Altmann, 2009;Barrouillet, De Paepe, & Langerock, 2012;Cowan & AuBuchon, 2008;Lewandowsky, Duncan, & Brown, 2004;Lewandowsky, Oberauer, & Brown, 2009;Neath & Nairne, 1995;. Barrouillet, Portrat, Vergauwe, Diependaele, andCamos (2011, p. 1315) have stated that "there is no direct evidence against the hypothesis of a time-related decay in the short-term", but other researchers have been much more critical and favour interference as the cause of forgetting (e.g. Lewandowsky et al 2009;Oberauer, Lewandowsky, Farrell, Jarrold, & Greaves, 2012).…”