Abstract

Oberauer (2019) suggested that the working memory capacity in word lists only limits the binding of words to serial positions, with no limit for the words themselves. I advocate a word item limit as a broad kind of binding of each word to the current trial. I propose that the word capacity limit can be observed in Oberauer’s data when binding of a word to the trial is crucial (Experiment 2, words drawn from a small pool and often repeated across trials), though probably much less so when this kind of binding is unimportant (Experiment 1, words drawn from a large pool and rarely repeated across trials). In Oberauer’s recognition procedure for lists of 2, 4, 6, or 8 words, the number of words in the response set was varied, including both words from the list (1, 2, 4, 6, or 8 of them) and words that were not from the list (0, 1, 2, or 4 of them). There was also a serial recall procedure. In a re-analysis of the data from Experiment 2, an overlooked item capacity limit was found that affected the distribution of erroneous responses. Specifically, when the correct answer was unknown to the participant (which happened more at longer list lengths), proportionally fewer words from the list were selected as responses; selection of non-list words increased. It is an important theoretical refinement of Oberauer’s position to include evidence of a word item capacity limit when the item-to-trial binding is crucial, as in his Experiment 2.

Highlights

  • Oberauer (2019) suggested that the working memory capacity in word lists only limits the binding of words to serial positions, with no limit for the words themselves

  • Experiment 1 is based on a large pool of words rarely repeated from trial to trial, whereas Experiment 2 is based on a small pool of words often repeated from trial to trial

  • The conclusion that capacity limits came from item-serial position binding limits was based on several findings: the fact that the proportion correct did not much change with the addition of lures that were not in the list, the observation that extra-list errors did not increase much with set size, and the result of measurement models converging on near-zero estimates of the set-size effect on item memory

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Oberauer (2019) suggested that the working memory capacity in word lists only limits the binding of words to serial positions, with no limit for the words themselves. There is a set of binding limits that includes item-to-serial position binding as Oberauer proposed, and a broader, item-to-trial binding that limited the number of words remembered from a list in Oberauer’s Experiment 2.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call