Working Memory: The State of the Science

465 Pages·2020·190.3 MB·English

by  Robert Logie, Valerie Camos, Nelson Cowan

Working Memory

Working Memory
State of the Science
Edited by
ROBERT H. LOGIE, VALÉRIE CAMOS, AND
NELSON COWAN
1
3
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.

It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© Oxford University Press 2021
The moral rights of the authors have been asserted
First Edition published in 2021
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2020935781
ISBN 978– 0– 19– 884228– 6
Printed and bound by
CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY
Oxford University Press makes no representation, express or implied, that the
drug dosages in this book are correct. Readers must therefore always check
the product information and clinical procedures with the most up-t o- date
published product information and data sheets provided by the manufacturers
and the most recent codes of conduct and safety regulations. The authors and
the publishers do not accept responsibility or legal liability for any errors in the
text or for the misuse or misapplication of material in this work. Except where
otherwise stated, drug dosages and recommendations are for the non-p regnant
adult who is not breast-f eeding
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and
for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials
contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
Foreword
It is hard to believe, but it has been almost a quarter century since we started to work on
our edited volume (Miyake & Shah, 1999a), Models of Working Memory: Mechanisms
of Active Maintenance and Executive Control (MWM hereafter). Around that time,
working memory research had become quite popular, leading to the proliferation of
distinct theoretical models. Our goal was to provide a forum for clarifying points of
agreement and disagreement among these models and promote their theoretical syn-
thesis by asking a common set of important theoretical questions.
We are truly honoured that the editors of this new volume, Working Memory: State
of the Science (WMSS hereafter), adopted the same common- question approach in ed-
iting this major update of the theoretical scene, more than 20 years after the publication
of the MWM volume. In fact, we find it amazing that working memory is most likely
the only research topic in cognitive psychology (and even in the entire field of psy-
chological science) that comes with three edited volumes implementing this common-
question approach, with the third one being the Variation in Working Memory volume
with a focus on individual differences (Conway, Jarrold, Kane, Miyake, & Towse, 2007).
When the planning for the 1999 MWM volume began, we were only a brand- new
assistant professor (Miyake) and a postdoctoral research associate (Shah), but we felt
that our aforementioned goal was timely and important enough to be worth our time
and effort. So we organized and hosted a 4-d ay workshop in Colorado in 1997 (with a
lot of help from our colleagues) and did our best to produce a highly integrative volume
that met our initial goal and the field’s need. Although we are really happy that we suc-
cessfully implemented this common- question approach, what we were most proud of
about our MWM volume was the fact that we were able to offer two substantial syn-
thesis chapters that we think provided thoughtful reflections on the theoretical state
of the field circa 1999, inspired by the contributors’ answers to our common questions
(Kintsch, Healy, Hegarty, Pennington, & Salthouse, 1999; Miyake & Shah, 1999b).
In writing this foreword, in addition to the chapters in this WMSS volume, we also
reread the two aforementioned synthesis chapters from the MWM volume (along with
the answers to our common questions provided by the contributors) to gain some in-
sights into how working memory research and its theoretical landscape have changed
since 1999. When we wrote our own synthesis chapter in MWM (Miyake & Shah,
1999b), we found it really useful and insightful to read Norman’s (1970) edited volume
on memory, entitled Models of Human Memory, and reflect on the field’s progress since.
As we highlighted in the MWM book, we were impressed with the transformation of
our conceptualization and understanding of working memory from 1970 to 1999. Most
of the models described in that 1970 volume conceptualized short-t erm memory as a
separate passive storage buffer for the sake of memorization, and, with the publication
vi Foreword
of Baddeley and Hitch’s (1974) seminal working memory chapter, the conception
of working memory reflected in the models represented in the 1999 MWM volume
seemed radically different from those represented in the 1970 volume. Moreover, a
surge of interest in examining individual differences in working memory capacity in
North America in the 1980s and 1990s, inspired by the development of complex span
tasks (e.g. Daneman & Carpenter, 1980; Turner & Engle, 1989), has led the field to fully
embrace the critical relevance of working memory in complex cognitive activities, such
as reading comprehension and reasoning. We are glad that this WMSS volume provides
a great new opportunity for working memory researchers to reflect on not only the cur-
rent state of the field but also the progress the field has made in the last 20 years or so
(1999– 2021).
Unfortunately, space limitations do not allow us to fully flesh out our own thoughts
on the theoretical development in the field (e.g. what changed, what has not, where to
go from here). However, we were really impressed with various new theoretical ideas
and empirical findings outlined in the individual chapters. At the most global level,
major theoretical progress (and even innovation) made since 1999 in the specification
of key working memory processes and mechanisms was quite evident when we read the
chapters in this volume (e.g. the process of updating, re-e xamining of ways in which
items are refreshed and maintained, the nature of working memory limits, and indi-
vidual differences in working memory capacity). And such theoretical advances are
supported by impressive arrays of empirical evidence (e.g. experimental, individual
differences, cognitive neuroscience, and computational modelling), derived from more
sophisticated research and data-a nalytic methodology than was the case back in 1999.
At a more specific level, what struck us as the most exciting new trend in the field,
clearly reflected in the current volume throughout, concerns some positive changes
in the way we do science, something we had hoped to see when we edited the MWM
volume. In our 1999 synthesis chapter (Miyake & Shah, 1999b), we suggested that one
important future research direction was more competitive argumentation and further
theoretical synthesis. Specifically, we argued that ‘it is time to move forward and start
rigorously testing competing, mutually incompatible claims through competitive argu-
mentation as well as actively synthesizing mutually compatible ideas within a coherent
framework’ (pp. 472–4 73). The current volume (as well as recent publications cited in
the chapters) suggests that the field of working memory research has been moving in
that direction.
Indeed, competitive argumentation is at the forefront of the WMSS volume, with a
new common question dedicated to asking authors to discuss evidence that is incon-
sistent with their theoretical framework (Question 7). Several of the chapters are ad-
mirably direct in their responses to this question. It is also reflected in the ‘adversarial
collaboration’ approach taken by the editors of this volume and their colleagues and dis-
cussed in several of the chapters here (see also Cowan et al., 2020; Doherty et al., 2019).
Attempts for theoretical and empirical synthesis are also featured prominently in
different parts of the WMSS volume. Most noticeably, the question requiring authors
to define working memory (Question 1) was inspired by Cowan’s (2017) attempts to
Foreword vii
crystallize different conceptions of working memory and his observations about the
importance of clear shared definitions to support synthesis. Similarly, meta-a nalytic
synthesis mentioned in some of the chapters (e.g. as applied to the working memory
training literature) is another important recent development that has contributed to
increased efforts for synthesis. Moreover, recent attempts across multiple laboratories
to delineate a set of ‘benchmark’ working memory phenomena that must be explained
by any model (see, for example, Oberauer et al., 2018) are also important in terms of not
only forging consensus but also encouraging further competitive argumentation and
model comparison.
Despite these (and various other) highly visible and impressive advances in working
memory research in the last 22 years, however, we were also struck by the fact that
many of the theoretical ideas and questions discussed in the MWM volume (especially
in the last two synthesis chapters) are still quite relevant, even today. In light of what
we considered radical changes in theoretical conceptualizations of temporary memory
between 1970 and 1999, we were perhaps envisioning equally radical changes in theor-
etical developments between 1999 and 2021 (e.g. in the 1999 volume, we even briefly
speculated about the possibility that an umbrella term like working memory might be
no longer necessary!). Instead, after reading the chapters of the current WMSS volume,
we thought that our 1999 volume was not entirely obsolete and still offers some insights
relevant to the current working memory models, even though major updates to the
volume (of the sort offered by the current WMSS volume) are clearly needed.
For example, in our synthesis chapter in the MWM volume, we identified and pre-
sented six common themes that we thought ran across all ten models covered in the
MWM volume:
1. Working memory is not a structurally separate box or place in the mind or brain.
2. Working memory’s maintenance function is in the service of complex cognition.
3. Executive control is integral to working memory functions.
4. Capacity limits reflect multiple factors and may even be an emergent property of
the cognitive system.
5. Completely unitary, domain-g eneral view of working memory does not hold.
6. Long- term knowledge plays an integral role in working memory performance.
Even though some of these themes from the 1999 volume may need some tweaks and
updates (especially Theme 5), they are still generally applicable to the models included
in the WMSS volume. In fact, it might be an interesting and even inspirational exercise
for readers to try to identify such common themes that cut across all the models cov-
ered in the WMSS volume and examine how different those new themes are from those
six themes listed that we identified back in 1999.
We believe that it is important to have an up- to- date, state- of- the- art knowledge of
the current research and theoretical ideas and, for that purpose, this WMSS volume will
serve as a terrific tool. So, any serious researchers and students interested in studying
working memory should read this volume.
viii Foreword
At the same time, we invite readers to also take a close look at our 1999 MWM
volume (perhaps a second look for some readers) and engage in some historical re-
flections, asking questions such as: what changed in our theoretical thinking over the
last 20 years or so? Are there any general changes in the way working memory is de-
fined and conceptualized between 1999 and 2021 (i.e. compare the answers provided to
Question 1 in the two volumes)? Which unresolved issues have been compellingly re-
solved since 1999, and what unresolved issues still remain unresolved despite their im-
portance (the decay versus interference debate covered in detail in the MWM volume,
for example, is still highly relevant in this WMSS volume, and we are not sure whether
we are any closer to the resolution of this debate now)? What are the most important
future directions of research and theoretical development?
Typically, readers of an edited book take a look at only some of the chapters and do
not reflect much on the book as a whole, let alone on the historical progress of the field.
Edited volumes such as MWM and WMSS, in contrast, require (and deserve) a much
greater commitment from readers. We hope that readers will use this WMSS volume as
a starting point to engage in such active reflections about the past, present, and future
of working memory research and theories and thereby help continue to move the field
forward.
Akira Miyake, University of Colorado Boulder, USA
Priti Shah, University of Michigan, USA
References
Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. J. (1974). Working memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology
of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 8, pp. 47– 89). New York,
NY: Academic Press.
Conway, A. R. A., Jarrold, C., Kane, M. J., Miyake, A., & Towse, J. N. (Eds.). (2007). Variation in
working memory. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Cowan, N. (2017). The many faces of working memory and short-t erm storage. Psychonomic Bulletin
& Review, 24, 1158– 1170.
Cowan, N., Belletier, C., Doherty, J. M., Jaroslawska, A. J., Rhodes, S., Forsberg, A., . . . & Logie, R.
H. (2020). How do scientific views change? Notes from an extended adversarial collaboration.
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15, 1011– 1025.
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading.
Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Memory, 19, 450– 466.
Doherty, J. M., Belletier, C., Rhodes, S., Jaroslawska, A., Barrouillet, P., Camos, V., . . . & Logie, R. H.
(2019). Dual- task costs in working memory: An adversarial collaboration. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 45, 1529– 1551.
Kintsch, W., Healy, A. F., Hegarty, M., Pennington, B. F., & Salthouse, T. A. (1999). Models of
working memory: Eight questions and some general issues. In A. Miyake & P. Shah (Eds.), Models
of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control (pp. 412– 441).
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Miyake, A., & Shah, P. (Eds.) (1999a). Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance
and executive control. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Miyake, A., & Shah, P. (1999b). Toward unified theories of working memory: Emerging general con-
sensus, unresolved theoretical issues, and future research directions. In A. Miyake & P. Shah (Eds.),
Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control (pp. 442– 481).
New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Foreword ix
Norman, A. D. (Ed.). (1970). Models of human memory. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Oberauer, K., Lewandowsky, S., Awh, E., Brown, G. D. A., Conway, A., Cowan, . . . Ward, G. (2018).
Benchmarks for models of short-t erm and working memory. Psychological Bulletin, 144, 885– 958.
Smith, E. E., & Jonides, J. (1997). Working memory: A view from neuroimaging. Cognitive Psychology,
33, 5– 42.
Turner, M. L., & Engle, R. W. (1989). Is working memory capacity task dependent? Journal of Memory
and Language, 28, 127– 154.