The time course of updating in running span.

Running span can be performed by either passively listening to memory items or actively updating the target set. Previous research suggests that the active updating process is demanding and time consuming and is favored at slow rates of presentation while the passive strategy is employed at fast rates. Two experiments examined the time course of recruitment of resources during task performance and its sensitivity to presentation rate. In Experiment 1, participants performed 1 of 3 serial recall tasks: running span, simple span, and modified span. The tasks were completed at the same time as a choice reaction time (RT; CRT) task and the RTs were used to index the resource demands of the memory task. Running span generated higher RT costs than simple span. The costs were present only for positions at and beyond the point in the sequence when the target memory set was changed, indicating a shift to a more cognitively demanding mode of updating. At these positions there was a generalized increase in RT costs that peaked 1,000 ms following item presentation. In Experiment 2 the resource demands of running span varied with presentation rate and a peak demand at 1,000 ms was again evident, but only with a slow presentation rate. In conjunction with strategy reports, these data establish that the process of active updating in running span is slow and cognitively demanding, making it difficult to use when presentation rates are fast. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Can short-term memory be trained?

Is the capacity of short-term memory fixed, or does it improve with practice? It is already known that training on complex working memory tasks is more likely to transfer to untrained tasks with similar properties, but this approach has not been extended to the more basic short-term memory system responsible for verbal serial recall. Here we investigated this with adaptive training algorithms widely applied in working memory training. Serial recall of visually presented digits was found to improve over the course of 20 training sessions, but this improvement did not extend to recall of either spoken digits or visually presented letters. In contrast, training on a nonserial visual short-term memory color change detection task did transfer to a line orientation change detection task. We suggest that training only generates substantial transfer when the unfamiliar demands of the training activities require the development of novel routines that can then be applied to untrained versions of the same paradigm (Gathercole, Dunning, Holmes, & Norris, 2019). In contrast, serial recall of digits is fully supported by the existing verbal short-term memory system and does not require the development of new routines.

Feature coding dataset for trained and untrained working memory tasks in randomized controlled trials of working memory training.

The data presented in this article are produced as part of the original research article entitled "Working memory training involves learning new skills" (Gathercole, Dunning, Holmes & Norris, in press). This article presents a dataset of coded features for pairs of trained and untrained working memory (WM) tasks from randomized controlled trials of WM training with active control groups. Feature coding is provided for 113 untrained WM tasks each paired with the most similar task in the training program, taken from 23 training studies. A spreadsheet provides summary information for each task pair, its transfer effect size, and coding of the following features for each task: stimulus category, stimulus domain, stimulus modality, response modality, and recall paradigm.