Slave systems in verbal short-term memory

Abstract

Background The model of performance in short-term memory (STM) tasks that has been most influential in cognitive neuropsychological work on deficits of STM is the “working memory” model mainly associated with the work of Alan Baddeley and his colleagues. Aim This paper reviews the model. We examine the development of this theory in studies that account for STM performances in normal (non-brain-damaged) individuals, and then review the application of this theory to neuropsychological cases and specifications, modifications, and extensions of the theory that have been suggested on the basis of these cases. Our approach is to identify the major phenomena that have been discussed and to examine selected papers dealing with those phenomena in some detail. Main Contribution The main contribution is a review of the WM model that includes both normative and neuropsychological data. Conclusions We conclude that the WM model has many inconsistencies and empirical inadequacies, and that cognitive neuropsychologists might benefit from considering other models when they attempt to describe and explain patients’ performances on STM tasks.

Role for memory capacity in sentence comprehension: Evidence from acute stroke

“…Martin et al, 1994), for example when more than one noun precedes a verb. That verbal STM might involve not only phonological representations, but also lexical-semantic representations, suggests that a purely phonological store (as proposed by Baddeley & Hitch, 1974) may be too restrictive (see also Caplan, Waters, & Howard, 2012). Accordingly, language-based models of STM have emphasized the contribution of multiple levels of linguistic representations, including both phonological and lexical-semantic codes (e.g., N. Martin & Ayala, 2004; N.…”

Interpreting potential markers of storage and rehearsal: Implications for studies of verbal short-term memory and neuropsychological cases

“…However, our key point is to argue that this cannot be inferred from the absence of measurable phonological similarity and word length effects (cf. Caplan et al, 2012). The novel advance that we are able to make here is to show that reduced verbal short-term memory capacity will itself necessarily lead to reduced, absent, or even reversed phonological similarity and word length effects due to proportional scaling coupled with floor effects.…”

“…Given that patients with a verbal short-term memory deficit will, almost by definition, show very low levels of immediate serial recall, and if the size of these effects is proportional to overall performance, then one would expect similarity and length effects to be smaller than normal in such patients simply as a consequence of their memory impairment. Indeed, as Caplan et al (2012) note, when discussing the implications of a reduced phonological similarity effect (PSE) in the context of neuropsychological studies, Blower list lengths and reduced spans are associated with a smaller PSE^(p. 294). In addition, because overall immediate serial recall performance is known to be poorer when material is presented visually as opposed to auditorily (e.g., Harvey & Beaman, 2007;Murray, 1966) one would expect this reduction to be particularly marked with visual presentation (cf.…”

“…It should be noted that the status of the word length effect as a potential marker of rehearsal has been the subject of considerable debate (e.g., Beaman, Neath, & Surprenant, 2008;Brown & Hulme, 1995;Caplan, Waters, & Howard, 2012;Jalbert, Neath, Bireta, & Surprenant, 2010;Lewandowsky & Oberauer, 2008). However, in mainstream cognitive psychology authors who are sympathetic to the Baddeley model continue to interpret reductions in the word length effect or phonological similarity effect as evidence that experimental manipulations have compromised participants' ability to maintain information in verbal short-term memory, whether working with adults (Camos, Mora, & Barroullet, 2013;Lobley, Baddeley, & Gathercole, 2005) or children (Henry, Messer, Luger-Klein, & Crane, 2012;Mora & Camos, 2015;Tam, Jarrold, Baddeley, & Sabatos-DeVito, 2010).…”

“…If this analysis is correct, then reduced phonological similarity and word length effects among individuals with verbal short-term memory deficits, particularly with visual presentation of memoranda, would not, in and of themselves, necessarily provide any evidence of problems of rehearsal or recoding, or of reduced phonological storage capacity (cf. Caplan et al, 2012). Importantly, neuropsychological studies in this area have measured either phonological similarity or word length effects in terms of the absolute difference between span or recall scores across conditions (e.g., Belleville et al, 1992;Bisiacchi et al, 1989;Chiricozzi et al, 2008;Gorno-Tempini et al, 2008;Gvion & Friedmann, 2012;Howard & Franklin, 1990;Jacquemot et al, 2011;Papagno et al, 2008;Silveri & Baldonero, 2013;Trojano & Grossi, 1995;Vallar et al, 1990;Vallar et al, 1992;Vallar et al, 1997;Vallat-Azouvi et al, 2007;Waters et al, 1992).…”