ArticleMemory & cognition2022
The linguistic constraints of precision of verbal working memory.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Working memory (WM) precision has received little interest in the verbal WM domain, contrary to the visual WM domain. The aim of this study was to assess the precision with which words can be maintained in verbal WM. A probe-recognition task was used, in which the amount of phonological overlap between target and probe items was varied (25-75%). In Experiment 1, we assessed WM precision in monolingual, French-speaking young adults. In Experiment 2, we assessed WM precision in multilingual speakers with variable levels of language proficiency in German (L1), French (L2), and English (L3) in order to determine the extent to which WM precision is determined by the quality of underlying language representations. In Experiment 1, we observed that WM precision at the single-phoneme level was limited, with recognition performance decreasing considerably for the 75% overlap trials in which the probe and the target differed by a single phoneme. At the same time, recognition performance stayed above chance. In Experiment 2, we showed in multilingual speakers that discrimination accuracy was further reduced when tested in a second language. This study shows that phonological WM precision at the single-phoneme level is limited and furthermore depends upon the precision of the lexical representations in the linguistic system. Overall, this study provides support for theoretical models considering that verbal WM is grounded in the language architecture.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.