The Structure of Working Memory in Young Children and Its Relation to Intelligence.

Shelley Gray, Samuel Green, Mary Alt, Tiffany P Hogan, Trudy Kuo, Shara Brinkley, Nelson Cowan
Author Information
  1. Shelley Gray: Arizona State University, PO Box 870102, Tempe, AZ, US 85287-0102.
  2. Samuel Green: Arizona State University, PO Box 870102, Tempe, AZ, US 85287-0102.
  3. Mary Alt: University of Arizona, PO Box 210071, Tucson, AZ, US 85721.
  4. Tiffany P Hogan: MGH Institute of Health Professions, Charlestown Navy Yard, 36 1 Avenue, Boston, MA, US 02129.
  5. Trudy Kuo: Arizona State University, PO Box 870102, Tempe, AZ, US 85287-0102.
  6. Shara Brinkley: Arizona State University, PO Box 870102, Tempe, AZ, US 85287-0102.
  7. Nelson Cowan: University of Missouri-Columbia, 210 McAlester Hall, Columbia, MO, US 65211.

Abstract

This study investigated the structure of working memory in young school-age children by testing the fit of three competing theoretical models using a wide variety of tasks. The best fitting models were then used to assess the relationship between working memory and nonverbal measures of fluid reasoning () and visual processing () intelligence. One hundred sixty-eight English-speaking 7-9 year olds with typical development, from three states, participated. Results showed that Cowan's three-factor embedded processes model fit the data slightly better than Baddeley and Hitch's (1974) three-factor model (specified according to Baddeley, 1986) and decisively better than Baddeley's (2000) four-factor model that included an episodic buffer. The focus of attention factor in Cowan's model was a significant predictor of and . The results suggest that the focus of attention, rather than storage, drives the relationship between working memory, , and in young school-age children. Our results do not rule out the Baddeley and Hitch model, but they place constraints on both it and Cowan's model. A common attentional component is needed for feature binding, running digit span, and visual short-term memory tasks; phonological storage is separate, as is a component of central executive processing involved in task manipulation. The results contribute to a zeitgeist in which working memory models are coming together on common ground (cf. Cowan, Saults, & Blume, 2014; Hu, Allen, Baddeley, & Hitch, 2016).

Keywords

References

  1. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1999 Sep;128(3):309-31 [PMID: 10513398]
  2. Trends Cogn Sci. 2000 Nov 1;4(11):417-423 [PMID: 11058819]
  3. Behav Brain Sci. 2001 Feb;24(1):87-114; discussion 114-85 [PMID: 11515286]
  4. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2002 May;28(3):411-21 [PMID: 12018494]
  5. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2003 Mar;132(1):47-70 [PMID: 12656297]
  6. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2003 Mar;132(1):71-92 [PMID: 12656298]
  7. Dyslexia. 2004 Aug;10(3):196-214 [PMID: 15341198]
  8. Psychol Bull. 2005 Jan;131(1):61-5; author reply 72-5 [PMID: 15631551]
  9. Cogn Psychol. 2005 Aug;51(1):42-100 [PMID: 16039935]
  10. Neuron. 2005 Nov 23;48(4):687-97 [PMID: 16301183]
  11. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2006 May;135(2):298-313 [PMID: 16719655]
  12. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2006 Oct;59(10):1691-700 [PMID: 16945854]
  13. J Cogn Neurosci. 2006 Oct;18(10):1712-22 [PMID: 17014375]
  14. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2006 Oct;49(5):955-69 [PMID: 17077208]
  15. Child Dev. 2006 Nov-Dec;77(6):1698-716 [PMID: 17107455]
  16. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2007 Apr;50(2):408-28 [PMID: 17463238]
  17. Trends Cogn Sci. 2007 Jun;11(6):236-42 [PMID: 17475538]
  18. Mem Cognit. 2006 Dec;34(8):1754-68 [PMID: 17489300]
  19. Psychol Res. 2008 Jul;72(4):451-60 [PMID: 17851684]
  20. Psychol Bull. 2007 Nov;133(6):1038-66 [PMID: 17967093]
  21. Mem Cognit. 2008 Jun;36(4):799-812 [PMID: 18604962]
  22. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2009 Apr;52(2):269-88 [PMID: 18723601]
  23. Memory. 2008 Nov;16(8):918-33 [PMID: 18802804]
  24. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. 2008 Oct;39(4):498-511 [PMID: 18820091]
  25. Child Dev. 2009 Mar-Apr;80(2):606-21 [PMID: 19467014]
  26. Dev Psychol. 2010 Jan;46(1):279-85 [PMID: 20053024]
  27. Behav Res Methods. 2010 May;42(2):563-70 [PMID: 20479188]
  28. Res Dev Disabil. 2010 Nov-Dec;31(6):1258-63 [PMID: 20832241]
  29. Mem Cognit. 2011 Feb;39(2):231-44 [PMID: 21264630]
  30. Dev Psychol. 2011 May;47(3):898-904 [PMID: 21417518]
  31. J Cogn Neurosci. 2012 Jan;24(1):61-79 [PMID: 21955164]
  32. J Atten Disord. 2014 May;18(4):286-93 [PMID: 22323119]
  33. J Exp Child Psychol. 2013 Feb;114(2):187-202 [PMID: 23059128]
  34. J Exp Child Psychol. 2013 Feb;114(2):217-28 [PMID: 23073369]
  35. Psychol Bull. 1990 Mar;107(2):238-46 [PMID: 2320703]
  36. Psychon Bull Rev. 2013 Dec;20(6):1253-8 [PMID: 23653420]
  37. J Intellect Disabil Res. 2014 Jul;58(7):637-50 [PMID: 23802604]
  38. Span J Psychol. 2013;16:E14 [PMID: 23866207]
  39. J Sch Psychol. 2013 Aug;51(4):535-55 [PMID: 23870446]
  40. Behav Brain Res. 2014 Apr 15;263:70-9 [PMID: 24486257]
  41. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2014 Oct;143(5):1806-1836 [PMID: 24867488]
  42. Cereb Cortex. 2016 Jan;26(1):166-79 [PMID: 25146374]
  43. J Exp Child Psychol. 2014 Dec;128:105-19 [PMID: 25160938]
  44. Annu Rev Psychol. 2015 Jan 3;66:115-42 [PMID: 25251486]
  45. Psychol Rev. 2015 Oct;122(4):674-99 [PMID: 26437148]
  46. Psychon Bull Rev. 2016 Jun;23(3):750-63 [PMID: 26546100]
  47. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2016 Oct;78(7):2164-75 [PMID: 27142524]
  48. J Vis Exp. 2017 Jun 12;(124): [PMID: 28654032]
  49. Psychol Bull. 1988 Sep;104(2):163-91 [PMID: 3054993]
  50. Child Dev. 1966 Jun;37(2):283-99 [PMID: 5941895]
  51. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1996 Mar;125(1):4-27 [PMID: 8851737]

Grants

  1. R01 DC010784/NIDCD NIH HHS

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0memorymodelworkingBaddeleychildrenmodelsCowan'sresultsyoungschool-agefitthreetasksrelationshipnonverbalvisualprocessingintelligencethree-factorbetterepisodicbufferfocusattentionstorageHitchcommoncomponentphonological&studyinvestigatedstructuretestingcompetingtheoreticalusingwidevarietybestfittingusedassessmeasuresfluidreasoningOnehundredsixty-eightEnglish-speaking7-9yearoldstypicaldevelopmentstatesparticipatedResultsshowedembeddedprocessesdataslightlyHitch's1974specifiedaccording1986decisivelyBaddeley's2000four-factorincludedfactorsignificantpredictorsuggestratherdrivesruleplaceconstraintsattentionalneededfeaturebindingrunningdigitspanshort-termseparatecentralexecutiveinvolvedtaskmanipulationcontributezeitgeistcomingtogethergroundcfCowanSaultsBlume2014HuAllen2016StructureWorkingMemoryYoungChildrenRelationIntelligenceloopvisuospatialsketchpad

Similar Articles

Cited By