Two experiments investigated the relationship between performance on standard tests of verbal working-memory and the on-line construction of syntactic form. In Experiment 1, working-memory was measured in 100 college students on a version of the Daneman and Carpenter (1980) reading-span task, and online syntactic processing was assessed using a self-paced listening task with four sentence types. In Experiment 2, working-memory was measured in 48 college students on two versions of the reading-span task and two other tests of verbal working-memory, and on-line syntactic processing was assessed using the self-paced listening task with an additional sentence type. In both experiments, there was no relationship between working-memory capacity and the increase in processing time seen for the on-line construction of syntactic form for either syntactically more complex or syntactically simpler sentences. The results indicate that the capacity of the working-memory system that is measured by standard working-memory tests does not determine the efficiency of on-line syntactic processing. They are consistent with the view that the working-memory system used for parsing is at least partially separate from that measured by traditional measures of working-memory capacity.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlmorA.KemplerD.MacDonaldM. C.AndersenE. S. & TylerL. K. (1999). Why do Alzheimer's patients have difficulty with pronouns? Working memory, semantics, and reference in comprehension and production in Alzheimer's disease. Brain and Language67202–228.
2.
BaddeleyA. D. (1986). Working memory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
3.
BaddeleyA. D. (1990). Human memory: Theory and practice. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd.
4.
BaddeleyA. D.BressiS.Delia Sala, S., Logie, R., & Spinnler, H. (1991). The decline of working memory in Alzheimer's disease. Brain1142521–2542.
5.
BaddeleyA. D. & HitchG. J.(1974). Working memory. In BowerG. A. (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Vol.8. Advances in research and theory. San Diego: Academic Press.
6.
BaddeleyA. D.LogieR.BressiS.Delia Sala, S. D., & Spinnler, H. (1996). Dementia and working memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38A, 608–618.
7.
BaloghJ.ZurifE. B.PratherP.SwinneyD. & FinkelL. (1998). Gap filling and end of sentence effects in realtime language processing: Implications for modeling sentence comprehension in aphasia. Brain and Language61169–182.
8.
ByrneM. D. (1998) Taking a computational approach to aging: The SPAN theory of working memory. Psychology and Aging, 13309–322.
9.
CaplanD.HildebrandtN. & WatersG. S. (1994). Interaction of verb selectional restrictions, noun animacy and syntactic form in sentence processing. Language and Cognitive Processes9549–585.
10.
CaplanD. & WatersG. S.(1990). Short-term memory and language comprehension: A critical review of the neuropsychological literature. In VallarG.&T. Shallice (Eds.), Neuropsychological impairments of short-term memory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
11.
CaplanD. & WatersG. S. (1999a). Issues regarding general and domain-specific resources. Behavioral and Brain Sciences2277–94.
12.
CaplanD. & WatersG. S. (1999b). Verbal working memory capacity and language comprehension. Behavioral and Brain Science22114–126.
13.
CaplanD. & WatersG. S. (2002). Working memory and connectionist models of parsing: A response to MacDonald and Christiansen. Psychological Review10966–74.
14.
ClarkH. H. (1973). The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior12335–359.
15.
CohenJ. D.MacWhinneyB.FlattM. & ProvostJ. (1993). PsyScope: An interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers. Behavior Research: Methods, Instruments and Computers25257–271.
16.
CohenL. & MehlerJ. (1996). Click monitoring revisited: An on-line study of sentence comprehension. Memory and Cognition2494–102.
17.
CraikF. I. M. (1986). A functional account of age differences in memory.KlixF.HagendorfH.Human memory and cognitive capabilities (pp. 409–21). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
18.
DanemanM. & CarpenterP. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior19450–66.
19.
DanemanM. & MerickleP. M. (1996). Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review3422–433.
20.
DunnJ. (1994). SoundEdit (Version 2) [Computer software]. San Francisco: Micromedia Inc.
21.
EngleR. W.TuholskiS. W.LaughlinJ. E. & ConwayA. R. A. (1999). Working memory, short-term memory, and general fluid intelligence: A latent-variable approach Journal of Experimental Psychology: General128309- 331.
22.
FerreiraF. & AnesM.(1994). Why study spoken language?In GernsbacherM. A. (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 33–56). San Diego: Academic Press.
23.
FerreiraF. & CliftonC. (1986). The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language25348–368.
24.
Ferreira. F., & Henderson, J. M. (1990). Use of verb information in syntactic parsing: Evidence from eye movements and word-by-word self-paced reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition16555–568.
25.
FerreiraF.HendersonJ. M.AnesM.D.Weeks Jr., P. A., & McFarlane, D.K. (1996). Effects of lexical frequency and syntactic complexity in spoken language comprehension: Evidence from the auditory moving window technique. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition22324–335.
26.
FiskJ. E. & WarrP. (1996). Age and working memory: The role of perceptual speed, the central executive, and the phonological loop. Psychology and Aging11316–323.
27.
FordM. (1983). A method for obtaining measures of local parsing complexity throughout sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior22203–218.
28.
FrauenfelderU.SeguiJ. & MehlerJ. (1980). Monitoring around the relative clause. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior22203–28.
29.
FriedericiA. D.SteinhauerK.MecklingerA. & MeyerM. (1998). Working memory constraints on syntactic ambiguity resolution as revealed by electrical brain responses. Biological Psychology47193–221.
30.
GarnseyS. M.PearlmutterN. J.MyersE. & LotockyM. A. (1997). The contributions of verb bias and plausibility to the comprehension of temporarily ambiguous sentences. Journal of Memory and Language3758–93.
31.
GathercoleS. E. & BaddeleyA.D. (1993). Working memory and language. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd.
32.
GibsonE. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies, Cognition681–76.
33.
GunterT.VosS. & FriedericiA. D.(1999). Memory or aging? That's the question: An electrophysiological perspective on language. In KemperS.&R. Kliegl (Eds.), Constraints on language: Aging, grammar and memory (pp. 249–282). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
34.
HaarmanH. J.JustM. A. & CarpenterP. A. (1997). Aphasic sentence comprehension as a resource deficit: A computational approach. Brain and Language5976–120.
35.
JustM. A. & CarpenterP. A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review99(1), 122–149.
36.
KemperS. & KemtesK. A.(1999). Limitations on syntactic processing. In KemperS.&R. Kliegl (Eds.), Constraints on language: Aging, grammar and memory (pp. 79–105). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
37.
KingJ. & JustM. A. (1991). Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory. Journal of Memory and Language30580–602.
38.
KingJ. & KutasM. (1995). Who did what and when? Using word- and clause-level ERPs to monitor working memory usage in reading. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience7376–395.
39.
KlieglR. & MayrU. (1992). Shifting levels of analysis in the investigation of cognitive aging. Commentary. Human Development35343–349.
40.
KlieglR.MayrU.JunkerM. & FanselowG. (1999). Testing age invariancein language processes. In S. Kemper & R. Kliegl (Eds.), Constraints on language: Aging, grammar and memory (pp. 137–168). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
41.
KuceraH. & FrancisN. (1970). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
42.
KutasM. & KingJ. W. (1999). In-line measures of syntactic processing using event-related brain potentials. Behavioral and Brain Sciences22104–105.
43.
LordF. M.(1956). Elementary models for measuring change. In HarrisC. W. (Ed.), Problems in measuring change (pp. 21–38). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
44.
MacDonaldM. C. & ChristiansenM. H. (2002). Reassessing working memory: Comment on Just and Carpenter (1992) and Waters and Caplan (1996). Psychological Review10935–54.
45.
MacDonaldM. C.JustM. A. & CarpenterP. A. (1992). Working memory constraints on the processing of syntactic ambiguity. Cognitive Psychology2456–98.
46.
MartinR. C. (1990). The consequences of reduced memory span for the comprehension of semantic versus syntactic information. Brain and Language381–20.
47.
MecklingerA.SchriefersH.SteinhauerK. & FriedericiA. D. (1995). Processing relative clauses varying on syntactic and semantic dimensions: An analysis with event-related potentials. Memory and Cognition23477–94.
48.
NelsonM. J. & DennyE. C. (1960). The Nelson-Denny Reading Test. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
49.
PearlmutterN. J. & MacDonaldM. C. (1995). Individual differences and probabilistic constraints in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language34521–542.
50.
RochonE.WatersG. S. & CaplanD. (1994). Sentence comprehension in patients with Alzheimer's disease. Brain and Language46329–349.
51.
SalthouseT. A. (1988). The role of processing resourcesin cognitive aging. In M. L. Howe & C. J. Brainerd (Eds.), Cognitive development in adulthood (pp. 185–239). New York: Springer-Verlag.
52.
Salthouse, T. A. (1991). Mediation of adult age differences in cognition by reductions in working memory and speed of processing. Psychological Science2179–183.
53.
SalthouseT. A. (1992). Mechanisms of age-cognition relations in adulthood. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
54.
SalthouseT. A. (1993). Speed and knowledge as determinates of adult age differences in verbal tasks. Journal of Gerontology4829–36.
55.
SalthouseT. A. (1996). The processing-speed theory of adult age differences in cognition. Psychological Review3403–428.
56.
ShahP. & MiyakeA. (1996): The separability of working memory resources for spatial thinking and language processing: An individual differences approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1254–27.
57.
SmithE. E.JonidesJ.MarshuetzC & KoeppeR. A. (1998). Components of verbal working memory: Evidence from neuroimaging. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 95876–882
58.
VerhaeghenP. & SalthouseT. A. (1997). Meta-analyses of age-cognition relations in adulthood: Estimates of linear and non-linear age effects and structural models. Psychological Bulletin122231–249.
59.
VosS. H.GunterT. C.SchriefersH. & FriedericiA. D. (2001). Syntactic parsing and working memory: The effects of syntactic complexity, reading span, and concurrent load. Language and Cognitive Processes1665–103.
60.
WannerE. & MaratsosM.(1978). An ATN approach to comprehension. In HalleM. M.MillerG.&J. Bresnan (Eds.), Linguistic theory and psychological reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
61.
WatersG. S. & CaplanD. (1996a). Processing resource capacity and the comprehension of garden path sentences. Memory and Cognition24342–355.
62.
WatersG. S. & CaplanD. (1996b). The capacity theory of sentence comprehension: A reply to Just and Carpenter (1992). Psychological Review103761–772.
63.
WatersG. S. & CaplanD. (1996c). The measurement of verbal working memory capacity and its relation to reading comprehension. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A, 51–79.
64.
WatersG. S. & CaplanD. (1997). Working memory and on-line sentence comprehension in patients with Alzheimer's disease. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research26377–400.
65.
WatersG. S. & CaplanD. (1999). Verbal working memory capacity and on-line sentence processing efficiency in the elderly. In S. Kemper & R. Kliegl(Eds.), Constraints on language: Aging, grammar and memory (pp. 107–136). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
66.
WatersG. S. & CaplanD. (in press). The reliability and stability of verbal working memory measures. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers.
67.
WatersG. S.CaplanD. & HildebrandtN. (1987). Working memory and written sentence comprehension. Attention and Performance12531–555.
68.
WatersG. S.CaplanD. & RochonE. (1995). Processing capacity and sentence comprehension in patients with Alzheimer's disease. Cognitive Neuropsychology121–30.
69.
WatersG. S.CaplanD. & YampolskyS. (in press). On-line syntactic processing under a concurrent memory load. Psychological Bulletin and Review.
70.
WatersG. S.RochonE. & CaplanD. (1998). Task demands and sentence comprehension in patients with dementia of the Alzheimer's type. Brain and Language62361–397.
71.
WechslerD. (1981). The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
72.
ZimmermanD. W. & WilliamsR. H. (1998). Reliability of gain scores under realistic assumptions about properties of pre-test and post-test scores. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology51343–351.
73.
ZurifE.SwinneyD.PratherP.WingfieldA. & BrownellH. (1995). The allocation of memory resources during sentence comprehension: Evidence from the elderly. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research24165–182.
