Development and Evaluation of an Online, Multicomponent Working Memory Battery

Abstract

Research has demonstrated strong connections among working memory (WM), higher-level cognition, and academic achievement. Despite the importance of WM, currently available WM tests have practical limitations and lack comprehensive coverage of multiple WM components. The Working Memory Battery (WOMBAT) includes nine subtests measuring multiple content domains and processing demands, in accordance with contemporary WM theoretical frameworks. The current study evaluated the WOMBAT factor structure and identified misfitting items using confirmatory factor analysis and Rasch modeling with scores from 125 adolescents and 177 adults (N = 302). Overall, results indicated the WOMBAT measures separate Verbal, Static Visual-Spatial, and Dynamic Visual-Spatial dimensions, and that more than 98% of items contribute to measurement of those dimensions. This provides support for the theoretical organization of WM into three distinct content domains in the WOMBAT. Misfitting items were identified using infit and outfit indices for further review to improve reliability and stability. Results also demonstrated adequate person separation and Rasch person reliability and item reliability. Test-retest reliability and internal consistency coefficients suggest adequate reliability for early-stage research, but further refinement is needed before the WOMBAT can be used for individual decision making. Implications for future test development and research on the WM construct are provided.

Resting state signatures of domain and demand-specific working memory performance

“…On a separate occasion they were administered the WOMBAT (Working Memory Battery; Englund, Decker, Woodlief, & DiStefano, 2014). …”

“…Participants completed four memory tasks, which are components of a larger Working Memory Battery that includes nine subtests (WOMBAT; Englund et al, 2014). The WOMBAT is a multicomponent test battery that measures separate Verbal, Static Visual-Spatial, and Dynamic Visual-Spatial domains across three levels of processing demands.…”

“… P – values are one-sided due to expected one-way results in the correlations, as age typically influences working memory measures (Englund et al, 2014). …”

Correlation between Cognitive Functions and Motor Coordination in Children with Different Cognitive Levels

“…The cognitive tests were administered using a laptop because previous studies confirmed the use of a computer and specific software as a valid and reliable method to assess different cognitive outcomes (Budde et al, 2008;Conners et al, 2008;Englund, Decker, Woodlief, & DiStefano, 2014;Gualtieri & Johnson, 2006;Hanania & Smith, 2010;Ma et al, 2015;Richardson, 2007 …”

The Effects of Implicit and Explicit Instruction on Foreign Language Learners’ Working Memory Capacity and L2 Grammatical Knowledge

“…However, because of the limited capacity of WM, the amount of information and the longevity of its existence depends upon WM span [4]. Historically, it was believed that WM is a heritable construct and is resistant to change, but recent research has affirmed that WM is malleable [5]. It has been suggested that WMC can be expanded by different cognitive, interactive, and computerized tasks, such as repetition, memorization with consciousness, chunking, and the use of multimedia [6].…”