scholarly journals Individual Differences in Lexical Learning Across Two Language Modalities: Sign Learning, Word Learning, and Their Relationship in Hearing Non-Signing Adults

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Martinez ◽  
Jenny Singleton
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Word Learning ◽  
Fluid Intelligence ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Term Memory ◽  
Learning Tasks ◽  
Lexical Learning

A considerable amount of research has been devoted to understanding individual differences in lexical learning, however, the majority of this research has been conducted with spoken languages rather than signed languages and thus we know very little about the cognitive processes involved in sign learning or the extent to which lexical learning processes are specific to word learning. The present study was conducted to address this gap. Two-hundred thirty-six non-signing adults completed 25 tasks assessing word learning and sign learning (via associative learning paradigms) as well as modality-specific phonological short-term memory, working memory capacity, crystallized intelligence, and fluid intelligence. Latent variable analyses indicated that, when other variables were held constant, fluid intelligence was predictive of both word and sign learning, however, modality-specific phonological short-term memory factors were only predictive of lexical learning within modality—none of the other variables made significant independent contributions. It was further observed that sign and word learning were strongly correlated. Exploratory analyses revealed that all lexical learning tasks loaded onto a general factor, however, sign learning tasks loaded onto an additional specific factor. As such, this study provides insight into the cognitive components that are common to associative L2 lexical learning regardless of language modality and those that are unique to either signed or spoken languages. Results are further discussed in light of established and more recent theories of intelligence, short-term memory, and working memory.

Working Memory: Models and Applications

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stoo Sepp ◽  
Steven J. Howard ◽  
Sharon Tindall-Ford ◽  
Shirley Agostinho ◽  
Fred Paas
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
Long Term Memory ◽  
Auditory Information ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Term Memory

In 1956, Miller first reported on a capacity limitation in the amount of information the human brain can process, which was thought to be seven plus or minus two items. The system of memory used to process information for immediate use was coined “working memory” by Miller, Galanter, and Pribram in 1960. In 1968, Atkinson and Shiffrin proposed their multistore model of memory, which theorized that the memory system was separated into short-term memory, long-term memory, and the sensory register, the latter of which temporarily holds and forwards information from sensory inputs to short term-memory for processing. Baddeley and Hitch built upon the concept of multiple stores, leading to the development of the multicomponent model of working memory in 1974, which described two stores devoted to the processing of visuospatial and auditory information, both coordinated by a central executive system. Later, Cowan’s theorizing focused on attentional factors in the effortful and effortless activation and maintenance of information in working memory. In 1988, Cowan published his model—the scope and control of attention model. In contrast, since the early 2000s Engle has investigated working memory capacity through the lens of his individual differences model, which does not seek to quantify capacity in the same way as Miller or Cowan. Instead, this model describes working memory capacity as the interplay between primary memory (working memory), the control of attention, and secondary memory (long-term memory). This affords the opportunity to focus on individual differences in working memory capacity and extend theorizing beyond storage to the manipulation of complex information. These models and advancements have made significant contributions to understandings of learning and cognition, informing educational research and practice in particular. Emerging areas of inquiry include investigating use of gestures to support working memory processing, leveraging working memory measures as a means to target instructional strategies for individual learners, and working memory training. Given that working memory is still debated, and not yet fully understood, researchers continue to investigate its nature, its role in learning and development, and its implications for educational curricula, pedagogy, and practice.

Distinction between Visuo-Spatial Short-Term-Memory and Working Memory Span Tasks

2006 ◽  
Vol 65 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thierry Lecerf ◽  
Jean-Luc Roulin
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Fluid Intelligence ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Memory Span ◽  
Item Difficulty ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Term Memory ◽  
Spatial Span ◽  
Span Test ◽  
Span Tasks

Six experiments are presented that examined the constraints underlying performance in two visuo-spatial span tasks. In the Location Span Test (LST), participants have to memorize the cells of a 5×5 matrix containing arrows, while in the Direction Span Test (DST) they have to memorize the cells pointed at by arrows. The main objective was to assess whether both tasks were similarly influenced by experimental factors. Results showed that performance improved with longer encoding time (1-s. vs. 3-s) only for the DST. Maintenance interval (0-s vs. 5-s) and order of item difficulty (ascending vs. descending) have no effect either on the LST or on the DST. Another experiment indicated that the DST is a better predictor of fluid intelligence. These results seem to provide evidence that the LST and the DST relate to different constructs. Implications of these findings for the distinction between short-term and working memory span tasks are discussed.

Working memory, short-term memory, and general fluid intelligence: A latent-variable approach.

1999 ◽  
Vol 128 (3) ◽  
pp. 309-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randall W. Engle ◽  
Stephen W. Tuholski ◽  
James E. Laughlin ◽  
Andrew R. A. Conway
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Latent Variable ◽  
Fluid Intelligence ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Term Memory ◽  
Variable Approach ◽  
Latent Variable Approach

scholarly journals Identifying Verbal Short-Term Memory and Working Memory Impairments in Individuals With Latent Aphasia

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
JoAnn P. Silkes ◽  
Reva M. Zimmerman ◽  
Wendy Greenspan ◽  
Laura Reinert ◽  
Diane Kendall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Term Memory ◽  
Memory Impairments ◽  
Normal Limits ◽  
The Temple ◽  
Further Development

Purpose This study was undertaken to explore whether measures of verbal short-term memory and working memory are sensitive to impairments in people with latent aphasia, who score within normal limits on typical aphasia test batteries. Method Seven individuals with latent aphasia and 24 neurotypical control participants completed 40 tasks from the Temple Assessment of Language and Short-term Memory in Aphasia (TALSA) that assess various aspects of verbal short-term memory, working memory, and language processing. Subtests were identified that differentiated between the two groups of participants. Results Twenty-one TALSA tasks were identified on which the participants with latent aphasia had significantly different performance than the typical control participants. All of these subtests engaged verbal short-term memory, and some involved working memory as well. Furthermore, the TALSA detected individual differences in linguistic profiles among participants with latent aphasia. Conclusions People with latent aphasia may be identified by tests that tap verbal short-term memory and working memory. In addition, the TALSA was found to be sensitive to the heterogeneity of this population. Further development of these measures will improve identification and treatment of this challenging population.

scholarly journals Successful Learning: Relationship Between Fluid Intelligence and Working Memory

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-74
Author(s):  
I.E. Rzhanova ◽  
O.S. Alekseeva ◽  
Yu.A. Burdukova
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Executive Control ◽  
Fluid Intelligence ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Memory Training ◽  
Long Term Memory ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Term Memory ◽  
The Relationship

The article provides an overview of modern works devoted to the study of the relationship between fluid intelligence and working memory. Recently, the world of psychological science has been actively discussing the topic of fluid intelligence and its impact on the academic achievements in childhood. One of the main cognitive characteristics most clearly associated with fluid intelligence is working memory. Working memory is a complex integrative function, in the implementation of which short-term and long-term memory, as well as executive control of attention, are involved. Until now, the debatable question remains, which of the components of working memory is most closely related to fluid intelligence. A number of studies conclude that the role of short-term memory is predominant, while in others executive control is called the most important component. A special place in the study of the relationship between working memory and fluid intelligence is occupied by scientific works which raise the question of the possibilities of improvement of fluid intelligence using working memory training series. In a number of training experiments, it was possible to obtain an improvement in the participants' fluid intelligence indicators after a series of working memory trainings.

scholarly journals The effect of bilingualism on lexical learning and memory across two language modalities: Some evidence for a domain-specific, but not general, advantage

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Martinez
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Young Adults ◽  
Word Learning ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Term Memory ◽  
Bilingual Advantage

The present study was conducted to replicate bilingual advantages in short-term memory for language-like material and word learning in young adults and extend this research to the sign domain, ultimately with the goal of investigating the domain specificity of bilingual advantages in cognition. Data from 112 monolingual hearing non-signers and 78 bilingual hearing non-signers were analysed for this study. Participants completed a battery of tasks assessing sign and word learning, short-term memory, working memory capacity, intelligence, and a language and demographic questionnaire. Overall, the results of this study suggested a bilingual advantage in memory for speech-like material—no other advantage (or disadvantage) was found. Results are discussed within the context of recent large-scale experimental and meta-analytic studies that have failed to find bilingual advantages in domain-general abilities such as attention control and working memory capacity in young adults.

Conceptual short-term memory (CSTM) supports core claims of Christiansen and Chater

2016 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary C. Potter
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Rapid Serial Visual Presentation ◽  
Language Comprehension ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Visual Presentation ◽  
Long Term Memory ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Term Memory ◽  
Use Of Knowledge

AbstractRapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) of words or pictured scenes provides evidence for a large-capacity conceptual short-term memory (CSTM) that momentarily provides rich associated material from long-term memory, permitting rapid chunking (Potter 1993; 2009; 2012). In perception of scenes as well as language comprehension, we make use of knowledge that briefly exceeds the supposed limits of working memory.

Working, Declarative, and Procedural Memory in Children With Developmental Language Disorder

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (12) ◽  
pp. 4162-4178
Author(s):  
Emily Jackson ◽  
Suze Leitão ◽  
Mary Claessen ◽  
Mark Boyes
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Declarative Memory ◽  
Memory Systems ◽  
Procedural Memory ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Term Memory ◽  
Visual Spatial

Purpose Previous research into the working, declarative, and procedural memory systems in children with developmental language disorder (DLD) has yielded inconsistent results. The purpose of this research was to profile these memory systems in children with DLD and their typically developing peers. Method One hundred four 5- to 8-year-old children participated in the study. Fifty had DLD, and 54 were typically developing. Aspects of the working memory system (verbal short-term memory, verbal working memory, and visual–spatial short-term memory) were assessed using a nonword repetition test and subtests from the Working Memory Test Battery for Children. Verbal and visual–spatial declarative memory were measured using the Children's Memory Scale, and an audiovisual serial reaction time task was used to evaluate procedural memory. Results The children with DLD demonstrated significant impairments in verbal short-term and working memory, visual–spatial short-term memory, verbal declarative memory, and procedural memory. However, verbal declarative memory and procedural memory were no longer impaired after controlling for working memory and nonverbal IQ. Declarative memory for visual–spatial information was unimpaired. Conclusions These findings indicate that children with DLD have deficits in the working memory system. While verbal declarative memory and procedural memory also appear to be impaired, these deficits could largely be accounted for by working memory skills. The results have implications for our understanding of the cognitive processes underlying language impairment in the DLD population; however, further investigation of the relationships between the memory systems is required using tasks that measure learning over long-term intervals. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13250180

The constructs of short-term memory and working memory

1997 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randall W. Engle ◽  
Stephen Tuholski ◽  
James Laughlin ◽  
Andrew Conway
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Short Term Memory ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Term Memory
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document