Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Response to Barrouillet and Camos: Interference or decay in working memory?


Lewandowsky, S; Oberauer, Klaus; Brown, G (2009). Response to Barrouillet and Camos: Interference or decay in working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(4):146-147.

Abstract

Barrouillet and Camos raise three objections to our conclusion that short-term forgetting is caused by interference rather than decay [1]. They suggest (i) that interference models are ‘vague’, (ii) that considering forgetting as a function of delay is questionable and (iii) that the timebased resource-sharing (TBRS) model is not challenged by the data we cited. We believe that these objections do not withstand scrutiny.

Abstract

Barrouillet and Camos raise three objections to our conclusion that short-term forgetting is caused by interference rather than decay [1]. They suggest (i) that interference models are ‘vague’, (ii) that considering forgetting as a function of delay is questionable and (iii) that the timebased resource-sharing (TBRS) model is not challenged by the data we cited. We believe that these objections do not withstand scrutiny.

Statistics

Citations

6 citations in Web of Science®
7 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

1 download since deposited on 21 Oct 2009
0 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

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:March 2009
Deposited On:21 Oct 2009 10:23
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 13:30
Publisher:Elsevier
ISSN:1364-6613
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2009.01.003

Download