Individual Differences in Memory Span: The Contribution of Rehearsal, Access to Lexical Memory, and Output Speed

Purpose Working memory capacity and language ability modulate speech reception; however, the respective roles of peripheral and cognitive processing are unclear. The contribution of individual differences in these abilities to utilization of spatial cues when separating speech from informational and energetic masking backgrounds in children has not yet been determined. Therefore, this study explored whether speech reception in children is modulated by environmental factors, such as the type of background noise and spatial configuration of target and noise sources, and individual differences in the cognitive and linguistic abilities of listeners. Method Speech reception thresholds were assessed in 39 children aged 5–7 years in simulated school listening environments. Speech reception thresholds of target sentences spoken by an adult male consisting of number and color combinations were measured using an adaptive procedure, with speech-shaped white noise and single-talker backgrounds that were either collocated (target and back-ground at 0°) or spatially separated (target at 0°, background noise at 90° to the right). Spatial release from masking was assessed alongside memory span and expressive language. Results and Conclusion Significant main effect results showed that speech reception thresholds were highest for informational maskers and collocated conditions. Significant interactions indicated that individual differences in memory span and language ability were related to spatial release from masking advantages. Specifically, individual differences in memory span and language were related to the utilization of spatial cues in separated conditions. Language differences were related to auditory stream segregation abilities in collocated conditions that lack helpful spatial cues, pointing to the utilization of language processes to make up for losses in spatial information.

Download Full-text

Individual Differences in Recall

Psychological Reports ◽

10.2466/pr0.1971.29.2.499 ◽

1971 ◽

Vol 29 (2) ◽

pp. 499-501

Author(s):

Stuart Miller ◽

David Fleishmann ◽

Robert Simpson

Keyword(s):

Individual Differences ◽

Memory Span ◽

Past Experience ◽

Selection Of

22 high- and 22 low-memory span Ss (H-MS, L-MS) sorted 52 words into anywhere from 2 to 7 categories. The H-MS group later recalled more of these words than the L-MS group. The effect of memory span upon recall was attributed to the selection of a significantly larger number of categories by the H-MS Ss. The unaccounted for variance in recall was discussed in terms of past experience and innate differences.

Download Full-text

Individual differences in memory span with and without activity intervening between presentation and recall.

Journal of Educational Psychology ◽

10.1037/h0024978 ◽

1967 ◽

Vol 58 (5) ◽

pp. 311-314 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Arthur E. Whimbey ◽

Sandra L. Leiblum

Keyword(s):

Individual Differences ◽

Memory Span

Download Full-text

Individual differences in the scope of speech planning: evidence from eye-movements

Language and Cognition ◽

10.1017/langcog.2013.5 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 6 (1) ◽

pp. 12-44 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

BENJAMIN SWETS ◽

MATTHEW E. JACOVINA ◽

RICHARD J. GERRIG

Keyword(s):

Working Memory ◽

Individual Differences ◽

Language Production ◽

Time Pressure ◽

Memory Span ◽

Verbal Working Memory ◽

External Pressures ◽

Speech Planning ◽

External Forces ◽

Initial Object

abstractPrevious research has demonstrated that the scope of speakers’ planning in language production varies in response to external forces such as time pressure. This susceptibility to external pressures indicates a flexibly incremental production system: speakers plan utterances piece by piece, but external pressures affect the size of the pieces speakers buffer. In the current study, we explore internal constraints on speech planning. Specifically, we examine whether individual differences in working memory predict the scope and efficiency of advance planning. In our task, speakers described picture arrays to partners in a matching game. The arrays sometimes required speakers to note a contrast between a sentence-initial object (e.g., a four-legged cat) and a sentence-final object (e.g., a three-legged cat). Based on prior screening, we selected participants who differed on verbal working memory span. Eye-movement measures revealed that high-span speakers were more likely to gaze at the contrasting pictures prior to articulation than were low-span speakers. As a result, high-span speakers were also more likely to reference the contrast early in speech. We conclude that working memory plays a substantial role in the flexibility of incremental speech planning.

Download Full-text