The personalisation method applied to a working memory task: Evidence of long-term working memory effects

Abstract

Ericsson and Kintsch (1995) proposed that, in situations of expertise, individuals can overcome working memory limitations by using long-term working memory. It allows a greater capacity than working memory thanks to long-term memory encoding and retrieving. To test this characteristic, an adaptation of Daneman and Carpenter's (1980) reading span was used. To operationalise expertise, the personalisation method (Guida & Tardieu, 2005) was employed. In Experiment 1, a personalised group, which read reading span sentences that mentioned familiar locations, was compared to a nonpersonalised group, which read sentences with unfamiliar locations. In Experiment 2, a personalised group, which read reading span sentences with neutral locations, was encouraged to mentally personalise these locations by thinking about known locations. This group was compared to a nonpersonalised group, which was encouraged to think about unknown locations. The personalised groups were expected to store and retrieve information in long-term memory via long-term working memory more easily than the nonpersonalised groups, which had to count massively on working memory. The results showed that personalisation enhanced reading span and confirmed one implication of the long-term working memory theory: high- and low-reading-span differences could also be due to long-term memory retrieval. Finally, these results are interpreted in terms of interaction between working memory size and long-term memory knowledge, showing that participants with a lower reading span benefited more from high domain knowledge than participants with a higher reading span.