The document describes a series of experiments that investigated the effect of memory load on processing performance. Specifically, it examined how increasing the number of items held in memory affected response times and accuracy on various processing tasks. The experiments varied the domain of the items held in memory (verbal vs spatial) and the type of concurrent processing task. The results showed that memory load had a larger detrimental effect on both processing accuracy and response times when items from different domains (verbal and spatial) had to be maintained together in working memory, compared to when items were from the same domain. This suggests maintaining cross-domain items in working memory is more cognitively demanding than single-domain items.

1. project 1:
The effect of Memory load on
Processing performance:
The continuation

2. idea
TBRS research 2001-2011:
• study central interference through effect of
processing on storage
• increase cognitive load, observe effect on memory
performance
 direct, linear relationship

3. idea
Idea now:
• study central interference through effect of storage
on processing
• increase memory load, observe effect on processing
performance
 What kind of relationship???

4. Experiment 1: silent verbal
= verbal version; storage = letters (0 to 7); processing = silent parity judgment
12 sec parity judgment recall
D 12 sec parity judgment recall
D P 12 sec parity judgment recall
D P H 12 sec parity judgment recall
D P H S 12 sec parity judgment recall
D P H S L 12 sec parity judgment recall
D P H S L B 12 sec parity judgment recall
D P H S L B F 12 sec parity judgment recall

5. Experiment 2: spatial
= spatial version; storage = locations (0 to 5); processing = spatial fit judgment
12 sec fit judgment recall
12 sec fit judgment recall
12 sec fit judgment recall
12 sec fit judgment recall
12 sec fit judgment recall
12 sec fit judgment recall

6. Experiment 3: babibou verbal
= verbal version; storage = letters (0 to 7); processing = babibou parity judgment
12 sec parity judgment + babibou recall
D 12 sec parity judgment + babibou recall
D P 12 sec parity judgment + babibou recall
D P H 12 sec parity judgment + babibou recall
D P H S 12 sec parity judgment + babibou recall
D P H S L 12 sec parity judgment + babibou recall
D P H S L B 12 sec parity judgment + babibou recall
D P H S L B F 12 sec parity judgment + babibou recall

7. Compare exp 1, 2 and 3
RT correct judgments
1200
1100
1000
RT CORRECT JUDGMENT
900
XP 1 VERBAL (LETTERS + PARITY)
XP 2 SPATIAL (LOCATIONS + FIT)
800
XP 3 BIS VERBAL (LETTERS + "PARITY +
BABIBOU")
700
600
500
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
MEMORY LOAD

8. Experiment 3bis: babibou verbal
= verbal version; storage = letters (0 to 7); processing = babibou parity judgment
12 sec parity judgment + babibou recall
D 12 sec parity judgment + babibou recall
D P 12 sec parity judgment + babibou recall
D P H 12 sec parity judgment + babibou recall
D P H S 12 sec parity judgment + babibou recall
D P H S L 12 sec parity judgment + babibou recall
D P H S L B 12 sec parity judgment + babibou recall
D P H S L B F 12 sec parity judgment + babibou recall

9. Experiment 4: verbal mono-/bi-syllabic words
= verbal version; storage = letters (0 to 7); processing = parity judgment
12 sec parity judgment recall
M M M M M M M 12 sec parity judgment recall
P.EX.
- PEUR CUIR SANG CIEL CAMP
- GARCON RAISON TRAVAIL MATIN REPAS

10. exp 4
RT correct judgments

11. Compare exp 1, 3 AND 4
RT correct judgments

12. Experiment 5: spatial
= spatial version; storage = locations (0 to 5); processing = PARITY fit judgment
12 sec parity judgment recall
12 sec parity judgment recall
12 sec parity judgment recall
12 sec parity judgment recall
12 sec parity judgment recall
12 sec parity judgment recall

13. exp 5
RT correct judgments
1200
1100
1000
900
EXP 2 LOC + FIT
EXP 5 LOC + PARITY
800
700
600
500
0 1 2 3 4 5

14. ALL
1200
1100
1000
EXP 1 LETTER + PARITY
EXP 2 LOC + FIT
900 EXP 3 LETTER + PARITY + BABIBOU
EXP 4 MONOSYLL + PARITY
EXP 4 MONOSYLL + PARITY
800 EXP 5 LOC + PARITY
700
600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

15. project 2:
Using the effect of Memory load on
Processing performance to examine:
Cost of maintaining cross-domain
items

16. CONDITION 1: verbal
= verbal version; storage = letters (0 to 5); processing = parity judgment + BABIBOU
12 sec parity judgment + BABIBOU recall
D 12 sec parity judgment+ BABIBOU recall
D P 12 sec parity judgment + BABIBOU recall
D P H 12 sec parity judgment + BABIBOU recall
D P H S 12 sec parity judgment + BABIBOU recall
D P H S L 12 sec parity judgment + BABIBOU recall

17. CONDITION 2: spatial
= spatial version; storage = locations (0 to 5); processing = parity judgment + BABIBOU
12 sec parity judgment + BABIBOU recall
12 sec parity judgment+ BABIBOU recall
12 sec parity judgment+ BABIBOU recall
12 sec parity judgment + BABIBOU recall
12 sec parity judgment + BABIBOU recall
12 sec parity judgment + BABIBOU recall

18. CONDITION 3: cross-domain
= spatial version; storage = letters in locations (0 to 5); processing = parity judgment +
BABIBOU
12 sec parity judgment + BABIBOU recall
12 sec parity judgment + BABIBOU recall
R
12 sec parity judgment + BABIBOU recall
12 sec parity judgment + BABIBOU recall
12 sec parity judgment + BABIBOU recall
12 sec parity judgment + BABIBOU recall

19. RESULTS
MEMACC
1.2
1
0.8
CROSS
0.6
SPAT
VERB
0.4
0.2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5

20. RESULTS
1
PROCACC
0.95
0.9
0.85
0.8
CROSS
0.75
SPAT
VERB
0.7
0.65
0.6
0.55
0.5
0 1 2 3 4 5

21. RESULTS
RT ALL
1050
SLOPE = 71 MS
1000
950
SLOPE = 41 MS
900
SLOPE = 33 MS
850
CROSS
SPAT
800
VERB
750
700
650
600
0 1 2 3 4 5

22. RESULTS
RT CONS
2500
CROSS
2000
SPAT
VERB
1500
1000
500
0 1 2 3 4

23. RESULTS
RT MAINT
900
SLOPE = 37 MS
850
SLOPE = 17 MS
800
SLOPE = 14 MS
750
CROSS
700
SPAT
VERB
650
600
0 1 2 3 4

24. DISC
on central level of WM:
• Not just « an object »
• verbal ≈ spatial
• cross ≈ verbal + spatial
but all RT vs maint RT?
? Force participants to start processing
immediately after presentation of memory items?
+ test with other material (e.g. objects in locations)