Individual differences in comprehending and producing words in context

Daneman, Meredyth; Green, Ian

doi:10.1016/0749-596x(86)90018-5

Cited by 394 publications

(342 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

307

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In both groups, 18 participants performed first an STM span task and then a working memory task. The latter task was inspired by the speaking span task, which was designed to assesses working memory resources in language production 32 . On each trial, participants were presented with a list of words and asked to recall each of the presented words in a separate, self-generated sentence.…”

Section: Experiments 3: Working Memory Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For native English speakers, the working memory span measured through the speaking span task is about 3 ± 1 items (mean = 3.15) (ref. 32 ). Importantly, similar speaking spans have been reported for native speakers of different spoken languages 32,33 .…”

Section: Experiments 3: Working Memory Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…32 ). Importantly, similar speaking spans have been reported for native speakers of different spoken languages 32,33 . In contrast, STM spans vary with phonological complexity and word length, and thus differ across languages.…”

Section: Experiments 3: Working Memory Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the spoken English working memory task, the 18 ASL sequences were translated into English word sequences. As in the original speaking span, the English sequences were presented in writing on a computer screen (1 noun/s; interstimulus interval = 10 ms) 32 .…”

Section: Experiments 3 -Working Memory Spanmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Short-term memory span: insights from sign language

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Short-term memory (STM), or the ability to hold information in mind for a few seconds, is thought to be limited in its capacity to about 7 ± 2 items. Notably, the average STM capacity when using American Sign Language (ASL) rather than English is only 5 ± 1 items. Here we show that, contrary to previous interpretations, this difference cannot be attributed to phonological factors, item duration or reduced memory abilities in deaf people. We also show that, despite this difference in STM span, hearing speakers and deaf ASL users have comparable working memory resources during language use, indicating similar abilities to maintain and manipulate linguistic information. The shorter STM span in ASL users therefore confirms the view that the spoken span of 7 ± 2 is an exception, probably owing to the reliance of speakers on auditory-based rather than visually based representations in linguistic STM, and calls for adjustments in the norms used with deaf individuals.Working memory refers to the capacity-limited ability to maintain and manipulate information relevant to an ongoing task. Over the years, a large number of studies have focused on the part of working memory dedicated to short-term maintenance of information, which is known as STM. As reports have documented a significant relationship between the size of the STM capacity for linguistic material and language abilities (for review, see refs. 1,2 ), much work has been conducted to uncover the mechanisms underlying the STM capacity limit. One of the most common measures of capacity limits in STM is the digit span task 3 , where subjects must repeat lists of digits in the same order as they are presented (i.e., forward serial recall). The number of digits to be recalled is progressively increased, and the STM span is defined as the longest sequence reported correctly. As noted in a seminal study in 1956 by Miller 4 , our ability to process information in such short-term memory tasks has a capacity limit of seven plus or minus two items. The 'magical number' of 7 ± 2 has been widely confirmed as the capacity limit in STM since this early work.However, the view that 7 ± 2 is the standard capacity of STM has been recently questioned. When non-nameable materials are used, the span of STM drops to four or five items 5 (for review, see ref. 6 ). It has been proposed that a STM span of 7 ± 2 is the exception rather than the rule. One hypothesis is that the exceptionally high STM span of 7 ± 2 is specific to linguistic material and derives from the ability of humans to chunk linguistic information 6 . An alternative possibility, however, is that the exceptionally high STM span of 7 ± 2 might be an effect of modality, arising from greater STM capacity for encoding serial information in auditory STM as compared to visual STM. In the present studies, we examined STM span in native users of ASL, which offers a unique opportunity to separate the contributions of language versus modality to STM capacity.

show abstract

Section: Experiments 3: Working Memory Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Experiments 3: Working Memory Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Experiments 3: Working Memory Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Experiments 3 -Working Memory Spanmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Short-term memory span: insights from sign language

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The ecological validity of spontaneous speech is unmatched as a dual task; people frequently walk and talk at the same time. Spontaneous speech involves highly complex coordination of processing and storage because speakers must plan what to say, encode it into words, generate appropriate grammatical structure, and then internally store the plans until they are ready to articulate the words and sentences [8]. Thus, spontaneous speech places demands on attention, working memory, language capacity, and motor programming.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interactions between cognitive tasks and gait after stroke: A dual task study

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the interactions between gait and three different cognitive tasks in people after stroke. Thirteen people post-stroke who were living in the community, were able to walk 10 m without physical assistance, and could respond verbally to auditory stimuli participated. Participants performed a walking task alone, three different cognitive tasks while seated, and each cognitive task in combination with walking. Gait data were acquired continuously for approximately 3 min. Reaction time and accuracy were recorded for two of the cognitive tasks (visuospatial task, working memory task). Speech samples from the spontaneous speech task were analyzed on several dimensions of language. Significant dual task effects were observed for gait speed, stride time, average stride length, and cadence, but not for stride time variability. Speech produced more gait interference than memory and visuospatial tasks. Interference effects on cognition were minimal; only speech was significantly affected by concurrent walking. Narratives in the dual task condition had more pauses, shorter sentences, but more utterances with new information. Even though participants in this study were mobility-impaired, they prioritized the cognitive tasks. Future research should determine whether dual task training can reduce gait decrements in dual task situations in people after stroke.⋆ P Plummer-D'Amato was supported by NIDRR Fellowship (Award ID# EH133P020005). There was no other source of funding for this study.

show abstract

Discriminative validity of the WRAML with ADHD and LD children

Phelps

1996

Psychol. Schs.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Wide Range Assessment of Memory and Learning (WRAML; Sheslow & Adams, 1990) is a nationally standardized instrument designed to assess memory and learning skills in children and adolescents. This study assessed the relationship of WRAML scores to WISC‐III and WJ‐R results in three groups: (a) LD children with reading difficulties, (b) ADHD children, and (c) nonhandicapped referred children. Total sample size was 120. Discriminant function analysis demonstrated that the WRAML provided little distinguishing information for ADHD and LD children. Likewise, the usefulness of the Learning subtests is questionable. It is suggested that inclusion of working memory tasks that require reconfiguration of material, problem solving, and more complexity may be more beneficial in identifying processing weaknesses with suspected ADHD and LD youngsters. © 1996 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

show abstract

Individual differences in comprehending and producing words in context

Cited by 394 publications

References 21 publications

Short-term memory span: insights from sign language

Short-term memory span: insights from sign language

Interactions between cognitive tasks and gait after stroke: A dual task study

Discriminative validity of the WRAML with ADHD and LD children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About