Paper detail

A Precise Measure of Working Memory Reveals Subjects Difficulties Managing Limited Capacity

Free recall consists of two separate stages: the emptying of working memory and reactivation [1]. The Tarnow Unchunkable Test (TUT, [2]) uses double integer items to separate out only the first stage by making it difficult to reactivate items due to the lack of intra-item relationships. 193 Russian college students were tested via the internet version of the TUT. The average number of items remembered in the 3 item test was 2.54 items. In the 4 item test, the average number of items decreased to 2.38. This, and a number of other qualitative distribution differences between the 3 and 4 item tests, indicates that the average capacity limit of working memory has been reached at 3 items. This provides the first direct measurement of the unchunkable capacity limit of language based items. That the average number of items remembered decreased as the number of items increased from 3 to 4 indicates that most subjects were unable to manage their working memories as the number of items increased just beyond the average capacity. Further evidence for the difficulty in managing the capacity limit is that 25% of subjects could not remember any items correctly at least in one of three 4 item tests and that the Pearson correlation between the 3 item and 4 item subject recalls was a relatively small 38%. This failure of managing a basic memory resource should have important consequences for pedagogy including instruction, text book design and test design. Because working memory scores are important for academic achievement, it also suggests that an individual can gain academically by learning how to manage her or his capacity limit.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.