The role of interference in memory span (original) (raw)

References

• Allport, A. (1989). Visual attention. In M. I. Posner (Ed.),Foundations of cognitive science (pp. 631–682). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  Google Scholar
• Anderson, J. R. (1983).The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  Google Scholar
• Baddeley, A. (1986).Working memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  Google Scholar
• Baddeley, A. D., &Hitch, G. (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: Academic Press.
  Google Scholar
• Borkowski, J. G. (1965). Interference effects in short-term memory as a function of level of intelligence.American Journal of Mental Deficiency,70, 458–465.
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Charness, N. (1987). Component processes in bridge bidding and novel problem-solving tasks.Canadian Journal of Psychology,41, 223–243.
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Conrad, R., &Hull, A. J. (1964). Information, acoustic confusion and memory span.British Journal of Psychology,55, 429–432.
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Conway, A., &Engle, R. (1994). Working memory and retrieval: A resource-dependent inhibition model.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,123, 354–373.
  Article Google Scholar
• Craik, F. I. M., &Byrd, M. (1982). Aging and cognitive deficits: The role of attentional processes. In F. I. M. Craik & S. Trehub (Eds.),Aging and cognitive processes (pp. 191–211). New York: Plenum.
  Google Scholar
• Crowder, R. G. (1976).Principles of learning and memory. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  Google Scholar
• Daneman, M., &Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,19, 450–466.
  Article Google Scholar
• Daneman, M., &Green, I. (1986). Individual differences in comprehending and producing words in context.Journal of Memory & Language,25, 1–18.
  Article Google Scholar
• Daneman, M., &Merikle, P. M. (1996). Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,3, 422–433.
  Google Scholar
• Dempster, F. N. (1981). Memory span and short-term memory capacity: A developmental study.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,4, 419–431.
  Google Scholar
• Dempster, F. N. (1985). Proactive interference in sentence recall: Topicsimilarity effects and individual differences.Memory & Cognition,13, 81–89.
  Google Scholar
• Dempster, F. N., &Cooney, J. B. (1982). Individual differences in digit span, susceptibility to proactive interference, and aptitude/achievement test scores.Intelligence,6, 399–416.
  Article Google Scholar
• Educational Testing Service (1976).Kit of factor-referenced tests. Princeton, NJ: Author.
  Google Scholar
• Engle, R. W., Cantor, J., &Carullo, J. J. (1992). Individual differences in working memory and comprehension: A test of four hypotheses.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,18, 972–992.
  Article Google Scholar
• Engle, R.W., Carullo, J. J., &Collins, K.W. (1991). Individual differences in working memory for comprehension and following directions.Journal of Educational Research,84, 253–262.
  Google Scholar
• Engle, R.W., Conway, R., Tuholski, S.W., &Shisler, R. J. (1995). A resource account of inhibition.Psychological Science,6, 122–125.
  Article Google Scholar
• Fry, A., &Hale, S. (1996). Processing speed, working memory, and fluid intelligence: Evidence for a developmental cascade.Psychological Science,7, 237–241.
  Article Google Scholar
• Gerard, L., Zacks, R. T., Hasher, L., &Radvansky, G. A. (1991). Age deficits in retrieval: The fan effect.Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences,46, 131–136.
  Google Scholar
• Gick, M. L., Craik, F. I. M., &Morris, R. G. (1988). Task complexity and age differences in working memory.Memory & Cognition,16, 353–361.
  Google Scholar
• Hamm, V. P., &Hasher, L. (1992). Age and the availability of inferences.Psychology & Aging,7, 56–64.
  Article Google Scholar
• Hartman, M., &Hasher, L. (1991). Aging and suppression: Memory for previously relevant information.Psychology & Aging,6, 587–594.
  Article Google Scholar
• Hasher, L., &Zacks, R. T. (1988). Working memory, comprehension, and aging: A review and a new view. In G. H. Bower (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 22, pp. 193–225). San Diego: Academic Press.
  Google Scholar
• Hasher, L., Zacks, R. T., &May, C. P. (1999). Inhibitory control, circadian arousal, and age. In A. Koriat & D. Gopher (Eds.),Attention and performance XVII (pp. 653–675). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  Google Scholar
• Jensen, A. R. (1964).Individual differences in learning: Interference factor (Final Rep., Cooperative Research Project No. 1897). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education.
  Google Scholar
• Just, M. A., &Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension.Psychological Review,87, 329–354.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Just, M. A., &Carpenter, P. A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory.Psychological Review,99, 122–149.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D. (1973).Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  Google Scholar
• Kane, M. J., &Hasher, L. (1995). Interference. In G. Maddox (Ed.),Encyclopedia of aging (2nd ed., pp. 514–516). New York: Springer-Verlag.
  Google Scholar
• Kausler, D. H. (1974).Psychology of verbal learning and memory. New York: Academic Press.
  Google Scholar
• Kyllonen, P. C., &Christal, R. E. (1990). Reasoning ability is (little more than) working-memory capacity?!Intelligence,14, 389–433.
  Article Google Scholar
• Kyllonen, P. C., &Stephens, D. L. (1990). Cognitive abilities as determinants of success in acquiring logic skill.Learning & Individual Differences,2, 129–160.
  Article Google Scholar
• Lustig, C., & Hasher, L. (1998).Working memory span: The role of interference from the past. Manuscript submitted for publication.
• Masson, M. E. J., &Miller, J. A. (1983). Working memory and individual differences in comprehension and memory of text.Journal of Educational Psychology,75, 314–418.
  Article Google Scholar
• McDowd, J. M., Oseas-Kreger, D. M., &Filion, D. L. (1995). Inhibitory processes in cognition and aging. In F. N. Dempster & C. J. Brainerd (Eds.),Interference and inhibition in cognition (pp. 363–401). San Diego: Academic Press.
  Chapter Google Scholar
• Navon, D. (1988a). The importance of being visible: On the role of attention in a mind viewed as an anarchic intelligence system. I. Basic tenets.European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,1, 191–213.
  Article Google Scholar
• Navon, D. (1988b). The importance of being visible: On the role of attention in a mind viewed as an anarchic intelligence system. II. Basic tenets.European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,1, 215–238.
  Article Google Scholar
• Rabinowitz, J. C., Craik, F. I. M., &Ackerman, B. P. (1982). A processing resource account of age differences in recall.Canadian Journal of Psychology,36, 325–344.
  Google Scholar
• Rosner, S. R. (1972). Primacy in preschooler’s short-term memory: The effects of repeated tests and shift-trials.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,13, 220–230.
  Article Google Scholar
• Salthouse, T. A. (1988). The role of processing resources in cognitive aging. In M. L. Howe & C. J. Brainerd (Eds.),Cognitive development in adulthood (pp. 185–239). New York: Springer-Verlag.
  Google Scholar
• Shah, P., &Miyake, A. (1996). The separability of working memory resources for spatial thinking and language processing: An individual differences approach.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,125, 4–27.
  Article Google Scholar
• Shute, V. J. (1991). Who is likely to acquire programming skills?Journal of Educational Computing Research,7, 1–24.
  Article Google Scholar
• Traxler, A. J. (1973). Retroactive and proactive inhibition in young and elderly adults using an unpaced modified recall test.Psychological Reports,32, 215–222.
  PubMed Google Scholar
• Underwood, B. J. (1957). Interference and forgetting.Psychological Review,64, 49–60.
  Article PubMed Google Scholar
• Watkins, O. C., &Watkins, M. J. (1975). Build-up of proactive inhibition as a cue-overload effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory,1, 442–452.
  Article Google Scholar
• Wickens, D. D., &Cammarata, S. A. (1986). Response class interference in STM.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,24, 266–268.
  Google Scholar
• Wickens, D. D., &Gittis, M. M. (1974). The temporal course of recovery from interference and degree of learning in the Brown-Peterson paradigm.Journal of Experimental Psychology,102, 1021–1026.
  Article Google Scholar
• Winocur, G., &Moscovitch, M. (1983). Paired associate learning in institutionalized and noninstitutionalized old people: An analysis of interference and context effects.Journal of Geronotology,38, 455–464.
  Google Scholar
• Young, C.W., &Supa, M. (1941). Mnemic inhibition as a factor in the limitation of the memory span.American Journal of Psychology,54, 546–552.
  Article Google Scholar
• Zacks, R. T., Radvansky, G. A., &Hasher, L. (1996). Studies of directed forgetting in older adults.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,22, 143–156.
  Article Google Scholar

Download references