Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2018 Jul 5;49(3):340-355.
doi: 10.1044/2018_LSHSS-17-0114.

Theories of Working Memory: Differences in Definition, Degree of Modularity, Role of Attention, and Purpose

Eryn J Adams  1 , Anh T Nguyen  1 , Nelson Cowan  1
Affiliations
Review

Theories of Working Memory: Differences in Definition, Degree of Modularity, Role of Attention, and Purpose

Eryn J Adams et al. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch. .

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this article is to review and discuss theories of working memory with special attention to their relevance to language processing.

Method: We begin with an overview of the concept of working memory itself and review some of the major theories. Then, we show how theories of working memory can be organized according to their stances on 3 major issues that distinguish them: modularity (on a continuum from domain-general to very modular), attention (on a continuum from automatic to completely attention demanding), and purpose (on a continuum from idiographic, or concerned with individual differences, to nomothetic, or concerned with group norms). We examine recent research that has a bearing on these distinctions.

Results: Our review shows important differences between working memory theories that can be described according to positions on the 3 continua just noted.

Conclusion: Once properly understood, working memory theories, methods, and data can serve as quite useful tools for language research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
A depiction of three models of working memory. Top: what Baddeley has termed the modal model, for example, after Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968); middle: a version of the A. D. Baddeley and Hitch (1974) model or a recent revision of it by A. Baddeley (2000); bottom: embedded-processes model of Cowan (1988, 1999).
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Three continua discriminating models of working memory from one another. Top, the degree of modularity; middle, the degree to which attention underlies the storage and handling of stored information in the model; bottom, the dependence and use of idiographic (individual difference) versus nomothetic (group mean) information.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Adam K. C. S., Vogel E. K., & Awh E. (2017). Clear evidence for item limits in visual working memory. Cognitive Psychology, 97, 79–97. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Allen R. J., Baddeley A. D., & Hitch G. J. (2017). Executive and perceptual distraction in visual working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 43(9), 1677–1693. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Atkinson R. C., & Shiffrin R. M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In Spence K. W. & Spence J. T. (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory, 2 (pp. 89–195). New York, NY: Academic Press.
    1. Awh E., Barton B., & Vogel E. K. (2007). Visual working memory represents a fixed number of items regardless of complexity. Psychological Science, 18, 622–628. - PubMed
    1. Baddeley A. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 417–423. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources