Are Working Memory and Attention Related Constructs?

Abstract

Abstract. The purpose of this study was to replicate the working memory model proposed by Oberauer, Suess, Wilhelm, and Wittmann (2000) and to clarify its relationship to selective attention. Eleven working memory and attention tests were administered to 125 students. Using structural equation models, we were able to confirm a facet model of working memory with three functional and two content factors. Thus, the present study provides further evidence for a facet model of working memory. Additionally, the factor selective attention was added to this model. We found only low to moderate correlations between selective attention and functional working memory factors. Therefore, this study provides further evidence that selective attention, as measured by the Testbattery for Attentional Performance (TAP), and working memory are distinct concepts.

The role of processes and contents in human memory: An item response theory approach

“…However, higher correlations between verbal-numeric and visuospatial latent variables (.70) suggest a general factor, which was confirmed by the good fit of a general factor model. Despite this, other studies (e.g., Buehner, Mangels, et al, 2005) also showed high correlations (.66) between verbal-numeric and visuospatial factors, confirming that both verbal-numeric and visuospatial factors are separate, but related factors. These correlations between factors are compatible with the Baddeley and Hitch (1974) model, where a content independent system contributes to a fair amount of variance of most memory measures.…”

“…Processing can be defined as the transformation of information (or derivation of new information). As mentioned by Buehner, Mangels, Krumm, and Ziegler (2005), the factor storage and processing is similar to the factors ''updating'' and ''working memory capacity'' proposed by other authors (e.g., Engle et al, 1999;Miyake, Friedman, Rettinger, Shah, & Hegarty, 2001). Supervision ''involves the monitoring of ongoing cognitive processes and actions, the selective activation of relevant representations and procedures, as well as the suppression of irrelevant, distracting ones'' (Oberauer et al, 2003, p. 169).…”

Development and Evaluation of an Online, Multicomponent Working Memory Battery

“…For example, WM tests from major cognitive batteries such as the Wechsler Intelligence Scales for Children–Fourth Edition (Wechsler, 2003) and the Woodcock–Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Abilities (Woodcock, McGrew, & Mather, 2001) are largely verbal, with little representation of visual-spatial WM. However, major theories (e.g., Baddeley, 2000) and psychometric studies of WM have consistently suggested WM includes several related but distinct processing demands and content domains, including at the least a verbal and a visual-spatial component (Buehner, Mangels, Krumm, & Ziegler, 2005; Cornoldi & Vecchi, 2000, 2003; Ferreira, Almeida, & Prieto, 2011; Oberauer, Schulze, Wilhelm, & Süß, 2005; Oberauer, Süß, Schulze, Wilhelm, & Wittmann, 2000; Oberauer, Süß, Wilhelm, & Wittmann, 2003). While verbal WM has particular importance for reading (Daneman & Carpenter, 1980; Gathercole & Pickering, 2000; Leather & Henry, 1994), visual-spatial WM is predictive of mathematics achievement (Bull, Espy, & Wiebe, 2008; Swanson, 2006).…”

Cerebral bases of cognitive training in working memory executive tasks

“…colleagues (2000, 2003) (Oberauer, Süß, Schulze, Wilhelm & Wittmann, 2000;Oberauer, Süß, Wilhelm & Wittman, 2003). Evidence is provided for the facet model in studies on individual differences by demonstrating the three functional processes into which working memory can be subdivided (Buehner, Mangels, Krumm & Ziegler, 2005;Oberauer et al, 2003).…”