Working Memory

Question 1

INTELLIGENCE

Answer 1

• fluid intelligence/reasoning = ability to find/manipulate info in memory & deploy attention

Question 2

PROBLEM SOLVING

Answer 2

• depends critically on ability to deploy WM & therefore attention
• aka. breaking complex task down into separately attended parts

Question 3

DOUBLE DISSOCIATION BETWEEN STM & LTM

Answer 3

• clear evidence for this
• double dissociation logic = if 2 functions depend on overlapping brain regions -> lesion to 1 brain region will tend to affect both functions
• BUT if they’re non-overlapping -> 2 functions = free to vary independently

Question 4

HM (1954)

Answer 4

• bilateral removal of temporal lobe
• concluded a dedicated memory system in medial temporal lobe
• severe amnesia (inability to form new LTM for events/facts)
• preserved STM
• preserved procedural memory

Question 5

KF (1969)

Answer 5

• identified w/lesion to perisylvian cortex which reduced digit span (STM) BUT preserved LTM
• double dissociation between LTM/STM w/HM
• strangest neuropsychological evidence for 2 functions being dissociable

Question 6

BADDELEY & HITCH (1974)

Answer 6

• working memory model
• key distinction between:
  1) storage (buffers) in visuospatial sketchpad/phonological loop
  2) executive functions (ie. coordination of resources/attentional control/stored info manipulation) in central executive
• based on evidence wealth for separability of dif functions at beh/neural lvls

Question 7

WORKING MEMORY DISTINCTIONS

Answer 7

• to make distinction between storage/executive processes in WM clear it’s worth considering what makes us human in terms of our WM ability
• STM storage = trivial; monkeys are sometimes better at this than us

Question 8

SHORT TERM MEMORY

Answer 8

• NOT working memory
• simply requires storage of info over short time period
• WM = ability to do something w/info; much more complex
• turns out that its the ability to do something w/info in WM that underlies intelligence

Question 9

GENERAL INTELLIGENCE: SPEARMAN’S ‘G’ FACTOR

Answer 9

• 1904; Spearman published paper examining correlations in kids between dif disparate measures:
  1) academic ability (teacher ratings/exam performance)
  2) sensory discrimination
  RESULTS
• correlations = all positive
• correlation between sensory ability/academic ability = almost perfect
• factor analysis revealed underlying factor common to performance of many dif task kinds aka. ‘g’ factor aka. general intelligence

Question 10

SPEARMAN’S G FACTOR: ADAPTATION

Answer 10

• adapted into 2 underlying factors later:
  1) GF (fluid intelligence)
• reasoning/problem solving
  2) GC (crystallised intelligence)
• general knowledge

Question 11

KYOLLEN & CHRISTAL (1990)

Answer 11

• asked “what underlies our ability to perform reasoning tasks of the kind measured by GF?”
• gave pps dif processes tests (ie. WM/general knowledge/processing speed)
  RESULTS
• found v high correlations between reasoning ability (fluid intelligence) & WM BUT not other processes

Question 12

KYOLLEN & CHRISTAL (1990): TASK EXAMPLES

Answer 12

1) pps required to judge sentences on logical consistence (ie. all swans are white; jane is white; so jane is a swan)
2) had to identify odd one out from alphabetical letter clusters
3) ABC numerical assignment/digit span task

Question 13

KYOLLEN & CHRISTAL (1990): INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES

Answer 13

• suggested close correspondence between WM & intelligence; correlation = so high they suggested intelligence = nothing more than WM
• other functions (ie. general knowledge) didn’t correlate highly at all
• important to distinguish between fluid/crystallised intelligence
• WM correlates w/fluid NOT crystallised intelligence

Question 14

KYOLLEN & CHRISTAL (1990): ABC NUMERICAL ASSIGMNET EVALUATION

Answer 14

• issues w/tests = don’t distinguish between storage (STM) & executive processes (WM)
• performance depends on combination of these processes

Question 15

KANE & EAGLE (2002): PROCEDURE

Answer 15

• used tasks involving working aspect of WM or not
• Q = if complex span task would correlate ^ strongly w/tests of fluid intelligence
  COMPLEX SPAN TASK
• pps had to solve equation & say a word out loud then recall words at the end
• requires working aspect of WM involving retention/manipulation & info processing
  SIMPLE SPAN TASKS
• pps merely had to say each word out loud then recall them at end
• requires STM retention; no manipulation/processing of maintained info

Question 16

KANE & EAGLE (2002): TESTS

Answer 16

RAVEN’S MATRICES
- test of general/fluid intelligence
- pps see pattern groups; must find pattern that fits into space
STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODEL
- measures relationships between variables

Question 17

KANE & EAGLE (2002): RESULTS

Answer 17

• structural equation model identified 3 factors underlying performance of tasks aka. 3 independent cognitive processes differentially engaged by tasks: WM/STM/processing speed
• examined extent to which factors correlated w/measure of fluid/general intelligence (GF)
• correlation between WM/GF = almost perfect
• BUT correlation between STM/GF = negative
• speed/GF = low correlation
• could argue they’re ^ difficult tasks BUT came up w/^ difficult STM task versions w/longer lists
• aka. performance matched across dif task types still showed same result pattern

Question 18

WM x FLUID INTELLIGENCE

Answer 18

• “working” component of WM predicts fluid intelligence; simple STM doesn’t
• fluid/general intelligence involves “executive attention” component of WM
• memory representations = maintained in highly active state in presence of interference
• representations may reflect action plans/goal states/task-relevant stimuli in environment

Question 19

WHY IS WM IMPORTANT TO INTELLIGENCE?

Answer 19

DUNCAN ET AL. (2012)
- carried out studies to suggest that it’s the ability to follow complex set of task rules that underlies fluid intelligence
- this ability depends in turn on ability to deconstruct complex task into separately attended elements
- key role for attention

Question 20

DUNCAN ET AL. (2012): PROCEDURE

Answer 20

• reasoned that there might be more general process involved in WM task kinds that correlate so closely w/intelligence
• in complex WM tasks pps have to remember set of rules for task performance
• reasoned that it may be this remembering process & implementing set of rules that is most closely associated w/intelligence
• gave pps a task involving complex set of rules
• also gave culture fair IQ test similar to Raven’s Matrices

Question 21

DUNCAN ET AL. (2012): RESULTS

Answer 21

• strongest correlation = between rule WM/intelligence
• other WM types (ie. complex span (digit/spatial/operation)) correlated w/fluid intelligence BUT not as strongly
• it appears that while process of manipulating/processing info in WM might be key component of fluid intelligence, it’s really construction/use of task rule set that underlies individual difs in fluid intelligence

Question 22

DUNCAN (2017): PROCEDURE

Answer 22

• effecting fluid intelligence involves construction of “mental program” for task performance aka. subdivide goals to sub-goals to break down complex problems into manageable chunks
• “critical function in fluid intelligence = splitting complex whole into simple separately attended parts”

Question 23

DUNACN (2017): METHODOLOGY

Answer 23

SEPARATED CONDITION
- all pps perform well on task (even w/low IQ)
COMBINED CONDITION
- correlation between fluid intelligence & performance on task
- low IQ pps perform worse

Question 24

SUMMARY

Answer 24

• WM underlies fluid intelligence
• WM = NOT simply storage
• it’s also ability to store/use task rules to mentally manipulate info held in memory
• in turn this depends on attention aka. ability to split complex task into simple separately attended parts