Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-c52kr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T06:20:36.186Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What do working-memory tests really measure?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 1999

Michael J. Kane ,
Andrew R. A. Conway  and
Randall W. Engle
Michael J. Kane
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA 30303-3083 mkane@gsu.edu
Andrew R. A. Conway
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL 30332-0170 aconway@uic.edu
Randall W. Engle
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332-0170 re23@prism.gatech.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

Individuals may differ in the general-attention executive component or in the subordinate domain-specific “slave” components of working memory. Tasks requiring sustained memory representations across attention shifts are reliable, valid indices of executive abilities. Measures emphasizing specific processing skills may increase reliability within restricted samples but will not reflect the attention component responsible for the broad predictive validity of span tasks.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 22 , Issue 1 , February 1999 , pp. 101 - 102
Copyright
© 1999 Cambridge University Press