UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Removal of information from working memory: A specific updating process


Ecker, Ullrich K H; Lewandowsky, Stephan; Oberauer, Klaus (2014). Removal of information from working memory: A specific updating process. Journal of Memory & Language, 74:77-90.

Abstract

Previous research has claimed that working memory (WM) updating is one of three primary central executive processes, and the only one to reliably predict fluid intelligence. However, standard WM updating tasks confound updating requirements with generic WM functions. This article introduces a method for isolating a process unique to WM updating, namely the removal of no-longer relevant information. In a modified version of an established updating paradigm, to-be-updated items were cued before the new memoranda were presented. Overall, longer cue-target intervals—that is, longer time available for removal of outdated information—led to faster updating, suggesting that people can actively remove information from WM. Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrated that well-established effects of item repetition and similarity on updating RTs were diminished with longer cue-target interval, arguably because representational overlap between outdated and new information becomes less influential when outdated information can be removed prior to new encoding. Experiment 3 looked at individual differences, using the reduction of updating RTs to measure removal speed. Removal speed was measured reliably but was uncorrelated to WM capacity. We conclude that (1) removal of outdated information can be experimentally isolated and measured reliably, (2) removal speed is a unique, active WM updating ability, and (3) the view of WM updating as a core executive process that uniquely predicts fluid abilities is overstated.

Abstract

Previous research has claimed that working memory (WM) updating is one of three primary central executive processes, and the only one to reliably predict fluid intelligence. However, standard WM updating tasks confound updating requirements with generic WM functions. This article introduces a method for isolating a process unique to WM updating, namely the removal of no-longer relevant information. In a modified version of an established updating paradigm, to-be-updated items were cued before the new memoranda were presented. Overall, longer cue-target intervals—that is, longer time available for removal of outdated information—led to faster updating, suggesting that people can actively remove information from WM. Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrated that well-established effects of item repetition and similarity on updating RTs were diminished with longer cue-target interval, arguably because representational overlap between outdated and new information becomes less influential when outdated information can be removed prior to new encoding. Experiment 3 looked at individual differences, using the reduction of updating RTs to measure removal speed. Removal speed was measured reliably but was uncorrelated to WM capacity. We conclude that (1) removal of outdated information can be experimentally isolated and measured reliably, (2) removal speed is a unique, active WM updating ability, and (3) the view of WM updating as a core executive process that uniquely predicts fluid abilities is overstated.

Citations

17 citations in Web of Science®
20 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:06 Faculty of Arts > Institute of Psychology
Dewey Decimal Classification:150 Psychology
Language:English
Date:2014
Deposited On:04 Jul 2014 13:36
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 17:57
Publisher:Elsevier
ISSN:0749-596X
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2013.09.003

Download

Full text not available from this repository.
View at publisher

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations