Whether forgetting from working memory (WM) is only due to interference or is also caused by temporal decay is still a matter of debate. In the present study, this question was examined using complex span tasks in which each memory item was followed by a series of processing episodes, the duration and number of which were varied. It is known that recall performance in these tasks depends on the cognitive load (CL) of concurrent processing conceived as the ratio between processing time and free time, higher CL resulting in lower spans. The decay-and-refresh hypothesis accounts for this effect by assuming that memory traces decay during processing but are refreshed during free time. This hypothesis predicts lower recall performance with longer processing episodes, but no effect of their number as long as CL remains constant. The interference-only hypothesis supposes that free time is used to alleviate the interference created by processing distractors. This hypothesis is potentially compatible with an effect of the duration of processing episodes through increased interference, but predicts a detrimental effect of their number. In three experiments, the recall pattern fitted the predictions of the decay-and-refresh hypothesis for verbal WM, but that of the interference-only hypothesis for visuospatial WM. Although the entire pattern of data is more easily accommodated by the decay-and-refresh hypothesis than by its interference-only contender, our results suggest that it is unwise to aim at identifying a unique source to a complex phenomenon like WM forgetting.
AshcraftM. H. (1992). Cognitive arithmetic: A review of data and theory. Cognition, 44, 75–106.
2.
BaddeleyA. D. (1986). Working memory. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
3.
BaddeleyA. D.HitchG. J. (1974). Working memory. In BowerG. A. (Ed.), Recent advances in learning and motivation (Vol. 8, pp. 647–667). New York, NY: Academic Press.
4.
BaddeleyA. D.LogieR. H. (1999). The multiple-component model In A. Miyake & P. Shah (Eds.), Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control (pp. 28–61). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
5.
BarrouilletP.BernardinS.CamosV. (2004). Time constraints and resource-sharing in adults’ working memory spans. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 83–100.
6.
BarrouilletP.BernardinS.PortratS.VergauweE.CamosV. (2007). Time and cognitive load in working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 333, 570–585.
7.
BarrouilletP.CamosV. (2014). On the proper reading of the TBRS model: Reply to Oberauer and Lewandowsky (2014). Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1331.
8.
BarrouilletP.CamosV. (2015). Working memory: Loss and reconstruction. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
9.
BarrouilletP.De PaepeA.LangerockN. (2012). Time causes forgetting from working memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 87–92.
10.
BarrouilletP.PlancherG.GuidaA.CamosV. (2013). Forgetting at short term: When do event-based interference and temporal factors have an effect?Acta Psychologica, 142, 155–167.
11.
BarrouilletP.PortratS.CamosV. (2011). On the law relating processing and storage in working memory. Psychological Review, 118, 175–192.
12.
BarrouilletP.PortratS.VergauweE.DiependaeleK.CamosV. (2011). Further evidence for temporal decay in working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 1302–1317.
13.
BaylissD. M.JarroldC.GunnD. M.BaddeleyA. D. (2003). The complexities of complex span: Explaining individual differences in working memory in children and adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 71–92.
14.
BrownG. D. A.LewandowskyS. (2010). Forgetting in memory models: Arguments against trace decay and consolidation failure. In Della SalaS. (Ed.), Forgetting (pp. 49–75). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
15.
BrownJ. (1958). Some tests of the decay theory of immediate memory. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 10, 12–21.
16.
CamosV.LagnerP.BarrouilletP. (2009). Two maintenance mechanisms of verbal information in working memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 613, 457–469.
17.
CampbellJ. I. D.AlbertsN. A. (2009). Operation-specific effects of numerical surface form on elementary calculation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 999–1011.
18.
CampbellJ. I. D.FugelsangJ. (2001). Strategy choice for arithmetic verification: Effects of numerical surface form. Cognition, 80, 21–30.
19.
ChechileR. A. (1987). Trace susceptibility theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116, 203–222.
20.
ConradR.HullA. J. (1964). Information, acoustic confusion, and memory span. British Journal of Psychology, 55, 429–432.
21.
CowanN. (1992). Verbal memory span and the timing of spoken recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 668–684.
22.
CowanN. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 87–185.
23.
CowanN. (2005). Working memory capacity. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
24.
CowanN. (2015). George Miller’s magical number of immediate memory in retrospect: Observations on the faltering progression of science. Psychological Review, 122, 536–541.
25.
CowanN.AuBuchonA. M. (2008). Short-term memory loss over time without retroactive stimulus interference. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 151, 230–235.
26.
CowanN.KellerT.HulmeC.RoodenrysS.McDougallS.RackJ. (1994). Verbal memory span in children: Speech timing clues to the mechanisms underlying age and word length effects. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 234–250.
27.
CrowderR. G. (1982). Decay of auditory memory in vowel discrimination. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 8, 153–162.
28.
CrowderR. G. (1993). Short-term memory: Where do we stand?Memory & Cognition, 21, 142–145.
29.
CurtisC. E. (2006). Prefrontal and parietal contributions to spatial working memory. Neuroscience, 139, 173–180.
30.
DehaeneS. (1992). Varieties of numerical abilities. Cognition, 44, 1–42.
31.
DehaeneS. (1997). The number sense. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
32.
DehaeneS. (2001). Précis of the number sense. Mind & Language, 16, 16–36.
33.
DehaeneS.CohenL. (1997). Cerebral pathways for calculation: Double dissociation between rote verbal and quantitative knowledge of arithmetic. Cortex, 33, 219–250.
34.
DehaeneS.PiazzaM.PinelP.CohenL. (2003). Three parietal circuits for number processing. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 20, 487–506.
35.
FarmerE. W.BermanJ. V.FletcherY. L. (1986). Evidence for a visuo-spatial scratch-pad in working memory. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 384, 675–688.
36.
FarrellS.OberauerK.GreavesM.PasiecznikK.LewandowskyS.JarroldC. (2016). A test of interference versus decay in working memory: Varying distraction within lists in a complex span task. Journal of Memory and Language, 90, 66–87.
37.
FaulF.ErtfelderE.LangA.-G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioural, and biomedical sciences. Behaviour Research Methods, 39, 175–191.
38.
GillebertC. R.MantiniD.ThijsV.SunaertS.DupontP.VandenbergheR. (2011). Lesion evidence for the critical role of the intraparietal sulcus in spatial attention. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 134, 1694–1709.
39.
HaberlandtK. (1997). Cognitive psychology. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
40.
JalbertA.Saint-AubinJ.TremblayS. (2008). Visual similarity in short-term recall for where and when. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 353–360.
41.
LewandowskyS.GeigerS. M.MorrellD. B.OberauerK. (2010). Turning simple span into complex span: Time for decay or interference from distractors?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 364, 958–978.
42.
LewandowskyS.GeigerS. M.OberauerK. (2008). Interference-based forgetting in verbal short-term memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 592, 200–222.
43.
LewandowskyS.OberauerK. (2009). No evidence for temporal decay in working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 356, 1545–1551.
44.
LewandowskyS.OberauerK. (2015). Rehearsal in serial recall: An unworkable solution to the nonexistent problem of decay. Psychological Review, 122, 674–699.
45.
LewandowskyS.OberauerK.BrownG. D. A. (2009). No temporal decay in verbal short-term memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13, 120–126.
46.
LilienthalL.HaleS.MyersonJ. (2014). The effects of environmental support and secondary tasks on visuospatial working memory. Memory & Cognition, 42, 1118–1129.
47.
LogieR. H.ZuccoG. M.BaddeleyA. D. (1990). Interference with visual short-term memory. Acta Psychologica, 75, 55–74.
48.
McCabeD. P. (2008). The role of covert retrieval in working memory span tasks: Evidence from delayed recall tests. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 480–494.
49.
McKeownD.HoltJ.DelvenneJ. F.SmithA.GriffithsB. (2014). Active versus passive maintenance of visual nonverbal memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 1041–1047.
50.
McKeownD.MercerT. (2012). Short-term forgetting without interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 1057–1068.
51.
MeiserT.KlauerK. C. (1999). Working memory and changing-state hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 1272–1299.
52.
MillerG. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.
53.
MoreyC. C.BielerM. (2013). Visual working memory always requires general attention. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 163–170.
54.
MoreyC. C.MallJ. T. (2012). Cross-domain interference costs during concurrent verbal and spatial serial memory tasks are asymmetric. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 1777–1797.
55.
NairneJ. S. (2002). Remembering over the short-term: The case against the standard model. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 53–81.
56.
OberauerK.FarrellS.JarroldC.LewandowskyS. (2016). What limits working memory capacity?Psychological Bulletin, 142, 758–799. doi:10.1037/bul0000046
57.
OberauerK.LewandowskyS. (2013). Evidence against decay in verbal working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142, 380–411.
58.
OberauerK.LewandowskyS. (2014). Further evidence against decay in working memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 73, 15–30.
59.
OberauerK.LewandowskyS.FarrellS.JarroldC.GreavesM. (2012). Modeling working memory: An interference model of complex span. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 779–819.
60.
PertzovY.BaysP. M.JosephS.HusainM. (2013). Rapid forgetting prevented by retrospective attention cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 1224–1231.
61.
PetersonL. R.PetersonM. J. (1959). Short-term retention of individual verbal items. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 193–198.
62.
PlancherG.BarrouilletP. (2013). Forgetting from working memory: Does novelty encoding matter?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 110–125.
63.
RayeC. L.JohnsonM. K.MitchellK. J.GreeneE. J.JohnsonM. R. (2007). Refreshing: A minimal executive function. Cortex, 43, 135–145.
64.
RerkoL.OberauerK.LinH.-Y. (2014). Spatially imprecise representations in working memory. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 3–15.
65.
RickerT. J.CowanN. (2010). Loss of visual working memory within seconds: The combined use of refreshable and non-refreshable features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 36, 1355–1368.
66.
RickerT. J.VergauweE.CowanN. (2014). Decay theory of immediate memory: From Brown (1958) to today (2014). The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69, 1969–1995.
67.
RouderJ. N.MoreyR. D.SpeckmanP. L.ProvinceJ. M. (2012). Default Bayes factors for ANOVA designs. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 56, 356–374.
68.
ShahP.MiyakeA. (1996). The separability of working memory resources for spatial thinking and language processing: An individual differences approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125, 4–27.
69.
UnsworthN.EngleR. W. (2007). The nature of individual differences in working memory capacity: Active maintenance in primary memory and controlled search from secondary memory. Psychological Review, 114, 104–132.
70.
Van AsselenM.KesselsR. P. C.NeggersS. F. W.KappelleL. J.FrijnsC. J. M.PostmaA. (2006). Brain areas involved in spatial working memory. Neuropsychologia, 44, 1185–1194.
71.
VergauweE.BarrouilletP.CamosV. (2009). Visual and spatial working memory are not that dissociated after all: A time-based resource-sharing account. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 1012–1028.
72.
VergauweE.BarrouilletP.CamosV. (2010). Verbal and visuo-spatial working memory: A case for domain-general time-based resource sharing. Psychological Science, 21, 384–390.
73.
VergauweE.CamosV.BarrouilletP. (2014). The impact of storage on processing: How is information maintained in working memory?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 1072–1095.
74.
VergauweE.CowanN. (2014). A common short-term memory retrieval rate may describe many cognitive procedures. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 126. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00126
75.
VergauweE.CowanN. (2015a). Attending to items in working memory: Evidence that refreshing and memory search are closely related. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 1001–1006.
76.
VergauweE.CowanN. (2015b). Working memory units are all in your head: Factors that influence whether features or objects are the favored units. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 41, 1404–1416.
77.
VergauweE.DewaeleN.LangerockN.BarrouilletP. (2012). Evidence for a central pool of general resources in working memory. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 24, 359–366.
78.
ZhangW.LuckS. J. (2009). Sudden death and gradual decay in visual working memory. Psychological Science, 20, 423–428.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
