title: A list-length constraint on incidental item-to-item associations.
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.
authors: Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri, McAlester Hall, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA, cowann@missouri.edu.
authors: Nelson
authors: N
authors: Cowan
authors: Kristin
authors: K
authors: Donnell
authors: J Scott
authors: JS
authors: Saults
mesh_terms: D001245:Association Learning / Q000502:physiology*; D001288:Attention / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008570:Memory, Short-Term / Q000502:physiology*; D011939:Mental Recall; D021641:Recognition, Psychology
references: Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2009 Jul;62(7):1420-9
references: 19048451
references: Mem Cognit. 1982 Jan;10(1):82-93
references: 7087773
references: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2002 May;28(3):411-21
references: 12018494
references: Nature. 1997 Nov 20;390(6657):279-81
references: 9384378
references: Psychol Rev. 2007 Jul;114(3):539-76
references: 17638496
references: Behav Brain Sci. 2001 Feb;24(1):87-114; discussion 114-85
references: 11515286
references: Psychon Bull Rev. 1997 Jun;4(2):145-66
references: 21331823
references: Neuropsychologia. 2011 May;49(6):1401-6
references: 21277880
references: Science. 1974 Feb 8;183(4124):482-8
references: 17773029
references: Psychol Rev. 1956 Mar;63(2):81-97
references: 13310704
references: J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998 Jun;74(6):1464-80
references: 9654756
references: Psychol Rev. 2012 Jul;119(3):480-99
references: 22486726
references: Mem Cognit. 2004 Apr;32(3):463-73
references: 15285129
references: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2011 Nov;37(6):1484-502
references: 21767065
references: Cogn Psychol. 2005 Aug;51(1):42-100
references: 16039935
references: Psychon Bull Rev. 2012 Oct;19(5):779-819
references: 22715024