Abstract
Evidence from dual-task studies suggests that working memory supports the retention and implementation of verbal instructions. One key finding that is not readily accommodated by existing models of working memory is that participants are consistently more accurate at physically performing rather than verbally repeating a sequence of commands. This action advantage has no obvious source within the multi-component model of working memory and has been proposed to be driven by an as yet undetected limited-capacity store dedicated to the temporary maintenance of spatial, motoric, and temporal features of intended movements. To test this hypothesis, we sought to selectively disrupt the action advantage with concurrent motor suppression. In three dual-task experiments, young adults’ immediate memory for sequences of spoken instructions was assessed by both action-based and spoken recall. In addition to classic interference tasks known to tax the phonological loop and central executive, motor suppression tasks designed to impair the encoding and retention of motoric representations were included. These required participants to produce repetitive sequences of either fine motor gestures (Experiment 1, N = 16) or more basic ones (Experiments 2, N = 16, and 3, N = 16). The benefit of action-based recall was reduced following the production of basic gestures but remained intact under all other interference conditions. These results suggest that the mnemonic advantage of enacted recall depends on a cognitive system dedicated to the temporary maintenance of motoric representations of planned action sequences.
Highlights
Recent studies of instruction-guided behaviour have recognised that the capacity to hold in mind the content of the instruction while simultaneously performing each step in turn is supported by working memory—a cognitive system combining limited-capacity storage with attentional control (e.g., Engle, Carullo, & Collins, 1991; Gathercole, Durling, Evans, Jeffcock, & Stone, 2008; Jaroslawska, Gathercole, Logie, & Holmes, 2016; Kim, Bayles, & Beeson, 2008; Yang, Allen, & Gathercole, 2016; Yang, Gathercole, & Allen, 2014)
A striking example of the difference between memory for tobe-repeated and to-be-performed tasks is the benefit of physical performance over verbal repetition at recall, termed the action advantage
In three experiments we investigated evidence suggesting that this effect arises from a dedicated temporary motor store located within working memory
Summary
Recent studies of instruction-guided behaviour have recognised that the capacity to hold in mind the content of the instruction while simultaneously performing each step in turn is supported by working memory—a cognitive system combining limited-capacity storage with attentional control (e.g., Engle, Carullo, & Collins, 1991; Gathercole, Durling, Evans, Jeffcock, & Stone, 2008; Jaroslawska, Gathercole, Logie, & Holmes, 2016; Kim, Bayles, & Beeson, 2008; Yang, Allen, & Gathercole, 2016; Yang, Gathercole, & Allen, 2014). The working memory model of Baddeley and Hitch (1974; Baddeley, 2000, 2003; Baddeley, Allen, & Hitch, 2011) was used to guide these investigations This model consists of a central executive responsible for attentional control within and beyond working memory that is supported by two specialised limited-capacity stores: the phonological loop and visuospatial sketchpad (Baddeley, 2000, 2003; Baddeley et al, 2011; Baddeley & Hitch, 1974). Empirical work distinguishing the different components of working memory has relied on dual-task methodologies These require participants to undertake a memory task while concurrently performing a secondary task during encoding, maintenance, or retrieval. Dual-task costs will emerge only when the two tasks tap the same component of working memory
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
