💾 Archived View for gmi.noulin.net › mobileNews › 536.gmi captured on 2021-12-05 at 23:47:19. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2023-01-29)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Mind's Limit Found: 4 Things at Once

Clara Moskowitz

LiveScience Staff Writer

LiveScience.comMon Apr 28, 10:05 AM ET

I forget how I wanted to begin this story. That's probably because my mind,

just like everyone else's, can only remember a few things at a time.

Researchers have often debated the maximum amount of items we can store in our

conscious mind, in what's called our working memory, and a new study puts the

limit at three or four.

Working memory is a more active version of short-term memory, which refers to

the temporary storage of information. Working memory relates to the information

we can pay attention to and manipulate.

Early research found the working memory cut-off to be about seven items, which

is perhaps why telephone numbers are seven digits long (although some early

telephone dialing started with a two- or three-letter "exchange," often the

first letters of a community name, followed by four or five figures, e.g.

PEnnsylvania 6-5000). Now scientists think the true capacity is lower when

people are not allowed to use tricks like repeating items over and over or

grouping items together.

"For example, when we present phone numbers, we present them in groups of three

and four, which helps us to remember the list," said University of

Missouri-Columbia psychologist Nelson Cowan, who co-led the study with

colleagues Jeff Rouder and Richard Morey. "That inflates the estimate. We

believe we're approaching the estimate that you get when you cannot group.

There is some controversy over what the real limit is, but more and more I've

found people are accepting this kind of limit."

The study was published April 14 in the journal Proceedings of the National

Academy of Sciences.

Masters of memory

To prevent subjects from grouping or using other memory-aids, the researchers

presented people with arrays of different-colored squares. The subjects were

then shown an array of the same squares without the colors. Afterward, they

were shown a single colored square in one location, and asked if the color

matched that of the square in the same position at the beginning.

"What's nice about this visual task that they used is that it really makes it

difficult to use some of those common strategies that are helpful with verbal

lists," said Michael Kane, a psychologist at the University of North Carolina

at Greensboro, who was not involved in the new study. "I think Cowan's work has

really been convincing in this."

While the average person may only be able to hold three or four things in mind

at once, some people have achieved amazing feats of working memory. Contestants

at the World Memory Championships (most recently held in Bahrain in September

2007) often recall hundreds of digits in order after only five minutes. But

even these masters of memory seem to start with the same basic capacities as

everyone else, and improve their abilities with strategies and tricks.

"A very famous study was a test done of a long-distance runner who learned to

associate digits together in ways that were meaningful to him with respect to

running times," Kane said. "He could repeat back lists of up to 80 digits in

the right order, but if you gave him a list of words, he was at seven

plus-or-minus two like everyone else."

The new working memory study builds on previous research, but provides the most

rigorous mathematical test of the three- to four-item estimate, Cowan said. The

team used a mathematical model that assumed people have a fixed number of slots

in their working memory, each one of which can only hold one item. When those

slots are filled, the model predicted, people would make random guesses. Based

on this assumption, the model was able to forecast the various results of the

trials with impressive accuracy.

"It is a pretty simple mathematical model but it predicted a very exquisite

pattern of data," Cowan told LiveScience. "The results really were simple. With

a single value of working memory capacity we could really account for all those

different scenarios."

Working memory and intelligence

Although there seems to be a cap on the average number of things a person can

remember at once, basic working memory capacity does vary among individuals.

Interestingly, those that test well on working memory tasks also seem to do

well at learning, reading comprehension and problem solving.

"People accept that intelligence seems to be related to working memory," Cowan

said. "The information you can hold in your mind at one time is the information

you can interrelate. If you have a better working memory we believe that your

problem-solving abilities are better."

Researchers don't know what causes these variations in working-memory abilities

- perhaps they are genetic, perhaps they arise from differences in early

childhood environments or education.

The good news is people can improve their performance on certain working-memory

tasks with training. When children practice these tasks, over time they get

better. And not only do their scores on the memory tasks improve, but their

scores on tests of attention and reasoning can also rise.

"The jury is still out on how useful this will be, but it's at least suggestive

that you can train skills at these tasks, and that this improvement can affect

other things," Kane said. "We don't know quite how they work together, but

attention and working memory seem to be very close cousins."

It's all in there

Researchers debate the relationship between working memory and long-term

memory. While some hold that the two are independent storage facilities, others

say working memory is simply the part of long-term memory that we can currently

access.

Many scientists believe that almost all of our experiences are encoded into

long-term memory, and that forgetting is simply a matter of not being able to

access that memory.

"It's in there somewhere, the problem is just getting to it," Cowan said.

"Everything gets encoded into long-term memory almost immediately, but it gets

encoded in a way that may not be distinct enough to be retrieved."