↓ Skip to main content

A list-length constraint on incidental item-to-item associations

Overview of attention for article published in Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
Title
A list-length constraint on incidental item-to-item associations
Published in
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, May 2013
DOI 10.3758/s13423-013-0447-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nelson Cowan, Kristin Donnell, J. Scott Saults

Abstract

We investigated the possibility that item-to-item associations form between items concurrently included in a capacity-limited region of working memory, but not outside of that region. Many studies indicate a central capacity limit of three to five items (e.g., Cowan Neuropsychologia 49:1401-1406, 2001). Participants received lists of three, six, or nine words along with an orienting task, selecting the most interesting word from each list. Consistent with expectations, a subsequent, unexpected test showed that memory of whether two words came from the same list or not was superior for three-word lists, as compared with six- and nine-word lists, which did not differ. This effect occurred even though the separation between the list positions of the two probe words was controlled across list lengths. The study demonstrates a source of implicit learning that depends upon a limited-capacity working memory faculty, a finding that should inspire further research on the function of working memory in long-term learning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 3%
Unknown 34 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 20%
Researcher 6 17%
Student > Master 4 11%
Other 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 7 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 14 40%
Neuroscience 4 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 9 26%