Skip Nav

Short Term Memory

Navigation menu

❶Bjork and Whitten and Tzeng made temporal distinctiveness arguments on the basis of what is called continual distractor list recall, in which a recency effect persists even when the list is followed by a distracter-filled delay before recall. Based on this study, the four-character limit could be seen as either a limit in the capacity of short-term memory or a limit in the rate with which information could be transferred from sensory memory into a categorical form before it decayed.

Historical roots of a basic scientific question




It is possible that not every temporarily accessible idea is, or even was, in conscious awareness. One might relate short-term memory to a pattern of neural firing that represents a particular idea and one might consider the idea to be in short-term memory only when the firing pattern, or cell assembly, is active Hebb, The individual might or might not be aware of the idea during that period of activation.

Working memory is not completely distinct from short-term memory. It is a term that was used by Miller et al. One relies on working memory to retain the partial results while solving an arithmetic problem without paper, to combine the premises in a lengthy rhetorical argument, or to bake a cake without making the unfortunate mistake of adding the same ingredient twice.

Their thinking led to an influential model Baddeley, in which verbal-phonological and visual-spatial representations were held separately, and were managed and manipulated with the help of attention-related processes, termed the central executive. In the paper, this central executive possibly had its own memory that crossed domains of representation.

By , this general memory had been eliminated from the model, but it was added back again by Baddeley in the form of an episodic buffer. That seemed necessary to explain short-term memory of features that did not match the other stores particularly semantic information in memory and to explain cross-domain associations in working memory, such as the retention of links between names and faces.

Because of the work of Baddeley et al. Some even include in that bundle the heavy contribution of long-term memory, which reduces the working memory load by organizing and grouping information in working memory into a smaller number of units Miller, ; Ericsson and Kintsch, However, that factor was not emphasized in the well-known model of Baddeley What is clear from my definition is that working memory includes short-term memory and other processing mechanisms that help to make use of short-term memory.

This definition is different from the one used by some other researchers e. This, however, is not so much a debate about substance, but rather a slightly confusing discrepancy in the usage of terms. One reason to pursue the term working memory is that measures of working memory have been found to correlate with intellectual aptitudes and especially fluid intelligence better than measures of short-term memory and, in fact, possibly better than measures of any other particular psychological process e.

It has been thought that this reflects the use of measures that incorporate not only storage but also processing, the notion being that both storage and processing have to be engaged concurrently to assess working memory capacity in a way that is related to cognitive aptitude.

More recently, Engle et al. However, more research is needed on exactly what we learn from the high correlation between working memory and intellectual aptitudes, and this issue will be discussed further after the more basic issue of the short-term versus the long-term memory distinction is addressed. Meanwhile, it may be helpful to summarize a theoretical framework Cowan, , , , , based on past research. This framework, illustrated in Fig. In this framework, short-term memory is derived from a temporarily activated subset of information in long-term memory.

This activated subset may decay as a function of time unless it is refreshed, although the evidence for decay is still tentative at best. A subset of the activated information is the focus of attention, which appears to be limited in chunk capacity how many separate items can be included at once. New associations between activated elements can form the focus of attention. Now the evidence related to this modeling framework will be discussed. If there is a difference between short- and long-term memory stores, there are two possible ways in which these stores may differ: A duration difference means that items in short-term storage decay from this sort of storage as a function of time.

A capacity difference means that there is a limit in how many items short-term storage can hold. If there is only a limit in capacity, a number of items smaller than the capacity limit could remain in short-term storage until they are replaced by other items. Both types of limit are controversial. Therefore, in order to assess the usefulness of the short-term storage concept, duration and capacity limits will be assessed in turn.

The concept of short-term memory limited by decay over time was present even at the beginning of cognitive psychology, for example in the work of Broadbent If decay were the only principle affecting performance in an immediate memory experiment, it would perhaps be easy to detect this decay. To assess decay one must take into account, or overcome, contaminating effects of rehearsal, long-term retrieval, and temporal distinctiveness, which will be discussed one at a time in conjunction with evidence for and against decay.

According to various researchers there is a process whereby one imagines how the words on the list are pronounced without saying them aloud, a process called covert verbal rehearsal.

With practice, this process comes to occur with a minimum of attention. Guttentag used a secondary task to show that rehearsal of a list to be recalled was effortful in young children, but not in adults. If, in a particular experimental procedure, no loss of short-term memory is observed, one can attribute that response pattern to rehearsal. There is still the possible objection that whatever utterance is used to suppress rehearsal unfortunately causes interference, which could be the true reason for memory loss over time instead of decay.

That problem of interference would appear moot in light of the findings of Lewandowsky et al. They presented lists of letters to be recalled and varied how long the participant was supposed to take to recall each item in the list. In some conditions, they added articulatory suppression to prevent rehearsal. They found no evidence of memory decay. A limitation of this finding, though, is that covert verbal rehearsal may not be the only type of rehearsal that participants can use.

Perhaps there are types that are not prevented by articulatory suppression. In particular, Cowan suggested that the process of mentally attending to words or searching through the list, an attention-demanding process, could serve to reactivate items to be recalled in a manner similar to covert verbal rehearsal. The key difference is that it would not be expected that articulatory suppression would prevent that type of rehearsal.

Instead, to prevent that type of rehearsal an attention-demanding task would have to be used. They have interposed materials between items to be recalled that require choices; they can be numbers to read aloud or multi-choice reaction times.

It is found that these interfere with retention to an extent commensurate to the proportion of the inter-item interval used up attending to the distracting items. As the rate of the distracting items goes up, fewer of the to-be-recalled items are recalled. The notion is that when the distracting task does not require attention, the freed-up attention allows an attention- based rehearsal of the items to be recalled. When the interposed task is more automatic and does not require as much attention e.

The verbal, attention-demanding stimuli should prevent both attention-based rehearsal and articulation-based rehearsal. If there is decay, then performance should decline across serial positions more severely when longer filled intervals are placed between items in the response.

Unfortunately, though, such results might be accounted for alternatively as the result of interference from the distracting stimuli, without the need to invoke decay. What seems to be needed, then, is a procedure to prevent both articulation-based and attention-based rehearsal without introducing interference. Cowan and Aubuchon in press tried out one type of procedure that may accomplish this.

They presented lists of seven printed digits in which the time between items varied within a list. In addition to some randomly timed filler lists, there were four critical trial types, in which the six inter-digit blank intervals were all short 0.

Moreover, there were two post-list response cues. According to one cue, the participant was to recall the list with the items in the presented order, but at any rate they wished. According to the other response cue, the list was to be recalled using the same timing in which it was presented. The expectation was that the need to remember the timing in the latter response condition would prevent rehearsal of either type. As a consequence, performance should be impaired on trials in which the first three response intervals are long because, on these trials, there is more time for forgetting of most of the list items.

Just as predicted, there was a significant interaction between the response cue and the length of the first half of the response intervals. The slight benefit of a long first half in that situation could occur because it allowed the list to be rehearsed early on in the response.

This, then, suggests there could be decay in short-term memory. If there is more than one type of memory storage then there still is the problem of which store provided the information underlying a response. There is no guarantee that, just because a procedure is considered a test of short-term storage, the long-term store will not be used.

For example, in a simple digit span task, a series of digits is presented and is to be repeated immediately afterward from memory. The dual-store theories of memory allow this. Although Broadbent and Atkinson and Shiffrin drew their models of information processing as a series of boxes representing different memory stores, with long-term memory following short-term memory, these boxes do not imply that memory is exclusively in one box or another; they are better interpreted as the relative times of the first entry of information from a stimulus into one store and then the next.

The question remains, then as to how one can determine if a response comes from short-term memory. Waugh and Norman developed a mathematical model to accomplish this. The model operated with the assumption that long-term memory occurs for the entire list, including a plateau in the middle of the list.

In contrast, by the time of recall, short-term memory is said to remain only at the end of the list. A slightly different assumption is that short- and long-term stores are not independent but are used in a complementary fashion.

The availability of short-term memory of an item may allow resources needed for long-term memorization to be shifted to elsewhere in the list. The data seem more consistent with that assumption. These studies show that, in immediate recall, performance in amnesic individuals is preserved at the last few serial positions of the list. It is as if the performance in those serial positions is based mostly or entirely on short-term storage, and that there is no decrease in that kind of storage in the amnesic patients.

In delayed recall, the amnesic patients show a deficit at all serial positions, as one would expect if short-term memory for the end of the list is lost as a function of a filled delay period Glanzer and Cunitz, Last, it has been argued that the loss of memory over time is not necessarily the result of decay.

Instead, it can be caused by temporal distinctiveness in retrieval. This kind of theory assumes that the temporal context of an item serves as a retrieval cue for that item, even in free recall. An item separated in time from all other items is relatively distinctive and easy to recall, whereas an item that is relatively close to other items is more difficult to recall because it shares their temporal cues to retrieval. Shortly after a list is presented the most recent items are the most distinct temporally much like the distinctness of a telephone pole you are practically touching compared to poles extending further down the road.

Across a retention interval, the relative distinctiveness of the most recent items decreases much like standing far away from even the last pole in a series. Although there are data that can be interpreted according to distinctiveness, there also are what look like dissociations between the effects of distinctiveness and a genuine short-term memory effect. One can see this, for example, in the classic procedure of Peterson and Peterson in which letter trigrams are to be recalled immediately or only after a distracting task, counting backward from a starting number by three, for a period lasting up to 18 s.

Peterson and Peterson found severe memory loss for the letter trigram as the filled delay was increased. However, subsequently, sceptics argued that the memory loss occurred because the temporal distinctiveness of the current letter trigram diminished as the filled delay increased. In particular, this delay effect was said to occur because of the increase across test delays in the proactive interference from previous trials. On the first few trials, the delay does not matter Keppel and Underwood, and no detrimental effect of delay is observed if delays of 5, 10, 15, and 20 s are tested in separate trial blocks Turvey et al.

Yet, there may be a true decay effect at shorter test intervals. Baddeley and Scott set up a trailer in a shopping mall so that they could test a large number of participants for one trial each, so as to avoid proactive interference. They found an effect of the test delay within the first 5 s but not at longer delays. Still, it seems that the concept of decay is not yet on very firm ground and warrants further study.

It may be that decay actually reflects not a gradual degradation of the quality of the short-term memory trace, but a sudden collapse at a point that varies from trial to trial. With a control for temporal distinctiveness, Cowan et al. The concept of capacity limits was raised several times in the history of cognitive psychology.

However, his autobiographical essay Miller, indicates that he was never very serious about the number seven; it was a rhetorical device that he used to tie together the otherwise unrelated strands of his research for a talk. Although it is true that memory span is approximately seven items in adults, there is no guarantee that each item is a separate entity.

Later studies suggested that the limit in capacity is more typically only three or four units Broadbent, ; Cowan, That conclusion was based on an attempt to take into account strategies that often increase the efficiency of use of a limited capacity, or that allow the maintenance of additional information separate from that limited capacity.

To understand these methods of discussing capacity limits I will again mention three types of contamination. These come from chunking and the use of long-term memory, from rehearsal, and from non-capacity-limited types of storage. Because it is not usually clear what chunks have been used in recall, it is not clear how many chunks can be retained and whether the number is truly fixed.

Broadbent proposed some situations in which multi-item chunk formation was not a factor, and suggested on the basis of results from such procedures that the true capacity limit is three items each serving as a single-item chunk.

For example, although memory span is often about seven items, errors are made with seven-item lists and the error-free limit is typically three items.

When people must recall items from a category in long-term memory, such as the states of the United States, they do so in spurts of about three items on average.

It is as if the bucket of short-term memory is filled from the well of long-term memory and must be emptied before it is refilled. Cowan noted other such situations in which multi-item chunks cannot be formed. For example, in running memory span, a long list of items is presented with an unpredictable endpoint, making grouping impossible.

When the list ends, the participant is to recall a certain number of items from the end of the list. Typically, people can recall three or four items from the end of the list, although the exact number depends on task demands Bunting et al. Individuals differ in capacity, which ranges from about two to six items in adults and fewer in children , and the individual capacity limit is a strong correlate of cognitive aptitude.

Another way to take into account the role of multi-item chunk formation is to set up the task in a manner that allows chunks to be observed. Tulving and Patkau studied free recall of word lists with various levels of structure, ranging from random words to well-formed English sentences, with several different levels of coherence in between. A chunk was defined as a series of words reproduced by the participant in the same order in which the words had been presented.

It was estimated that, in all conditions, participants recalled an average of four to six chunks. Each word used in the list was presented an equal number of times four, except in a non-studied control condition but what varied was how many of those presentations were as singletons and how many were as a consistent pairing.

The number of paired prior exposures was held constant across the four pairs in a list. A mathematical model was used to estimate the proportion of recalled pairs that could be attributed to the learned association i.

This model suggested that the capacity limit was about 3. The issue of rehearsal is not entirely separate from the issue of chunk formation.

In the traditional concept of rehearsal e. However, another possibility is that rehearsal involves the use of articulatory processes in order to put the items into groups. In fact, Cowan et al. They found impairments present in participants between the ages of 55 and 85 years of age. Memory distortion in Alzheimer's disease is a very common disorder found in older adults.

Performance of patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease was compared with the performance of age matched healthy adults. Episodic memory and semantic abilities deteriorate early in Alzheimer's disease.

Since the cognitive system includes interconnected and reciprocally influenced neuronal networks, one study hypothesized that stimulation of lexical-semantic abilities may benefit semantically structured episodic memory. It could also be regarded as a clinical option to counteract the cognitive decline typical of the disease. Aphasias are also seen in many elder adults. Aphasias are responsible for many sentence comprehension deficits.

The opinion is supported by many studies showing that many aphasics also have trouble with visual-memory required tasks. Core symptoms of schizophrenia patients have been linked to cognitive deficits. One neglected factor that contributes to those deficits is the comprehension of time. The study provided evidence that patients with schizophrenia process temporal information inefficiently.

Advanced age is associated with decrements in episodic memory. The associative deficit is in which age differences in recognition memory reflect difficulty in binding components of a memory episode and bound units. Even when neurological diseases and disorders are not present, there is a progressive and gradual loss of some intellectual functions that become evident in later years.

There are several tests used to examine the psychophysical characteristics of the elderly and of them, a well suitable test would be the functional reach FR test, and the mini—mental state examination MMSE.

The FR test is an index of the aptitude to maintain balance in an upright position and the MMSE test is a global index of cognitive abilities. These tests were both used by Costarella et al. Posttraumatic stress disorder PTSD is associated with altered processing of emotional material with a strong attentional bias toward trauma-related information and interferes with cognitive processing.

Aside from trauma processing specificities, a wide range of cognitive impairments have been related to PTSD state with predominant attention and verbal memory deficits. There have been few studies done on the relationship between short-term memory and intelligence in PTSD.

They found that people with PTSD had worse short-term, non-verbal memory on the BVRT, despite having comparable levels of intelligence on the RSPM, concluding impairments in memory influence intelligence assessments in the subjects. There are many tests to measure digit span and short term visual memory, some paper- and some computer-based, including the following:.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Not to be confused with working memory. Journal of Memory and Language. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. The case against the standard model". Annual Review of Psychology. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.

Psychological Review, 63, 81— A reconsideration of mental storage capacity". Behavioral and Brain Sciences. There is no capacity limited buffer in the Murdock free recall data. Human Performance and Limitations in Aviation. Pharmacology for Pharmacy Technicians.

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics. Journal of mental health. Archived from the original PDF on Journal of Psychiatric Research.

British Journal of Psychology. Personality and individual Differences , 9, pp. A History of Psychology in Autobiography. Stanford University Press, pp. Some limits on our capacity for processing information ". Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology. If the concentration of the solution is high, another effect that is seen is the scattering of light from the large number of quantum dots.

This assumption only works at low concentrations of the analyte. Presence of stray light. What calculations are needed to arrive at it.

Jun 08, Download for free at https: Notification Switch Would you like to follow the 'Chapter 8: Computer Literacy Exam 1. Theater History Final - Review.


Main Topics

Privacy Policy

Short-term memory (or "primary" or "active memory") is the capacity for holding, but not manipulating, a small amount of information in mind in an active, readily available state for a short period of time. For example, short-term memory can be used to remember a phone number that has just been recited.

Privacy FAQs

The memory system used for relatively permanent storage of meaningful information is called _____ memory. long-term Joan repeats a list of vocabulary words for the Spanish test to move them from her short-term to long-term memory.

About Our Ads

Short term memory has three key aspects: 1. limited capacity (only about 7 items can be stored at a time) 2. limited duration (storage is very fragile and information can be lost with distraction or passage of time) 3. encoding (primarily acoustic, even translating visual information into sounds).Author: Saul Mcleod. This model suggests that memory consists of three basic stores: sensory, short-term, and long-term and that each of these can be distinguished based on storage capacity and duration. While long-term memory has a seemingly unlimited capacity that last years, short-term memory is .

Cookie Info

Researchers demonstrated that the hippocampus functions in memory processing by creating lesions in the hippocampi of rats, which resulted in _____. Mapo Reply Join the discussion. The storage capacity of long-term memory is best described as a. a single item. b. about seven items. c. about seven volumes. d. limitless.