检查外部世界:记忆容量,而不是记忆自我效能,预示着工作记忆的卸载。

IF 1.8 4区 心理学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology Pub Date : 2025-01-02 DOI:10.1080/13803395.2024.2447263
Sanne Böing, Antonia F Ten Brink, Carla Ruis, Zoë A Schielen, Esther Van den Berg, J Matthijs Biesbroek, Tanja C W Nijboer, Stefan Van der Stigchel
{"title":"检查外部世界:记忆容量,而不是记忆自我效能,预示着工作记忆的卸载。","authors":"Sanne Böing, Antonia F Ten Brink, Carla Ruis, Zoë A Schielen, Esther Van den Berg, J Matthijs Biesbroek, Tanja C W Nijboer, Stefan Van der Stigchel","doi":"10.1080/13803395.2024.2447263","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Individuals with memory impairments may need to rely often on the external world (i.e. offloading). By memorizing only a fraction of the items at hand, and repeatedly looking back to the remainder of items (i.e. inspecting), they can avoid frailty or effortful memory use. However, individuals with subjective concerns may also prefer to rely on the external world even though their capacity is intact. Crucially, capacity assessment fails to recognize offloading strategies, while inspection assessment may reveal how people choose to deploy memory in everyday life. To disentangle the relative contributions of memory capacity and memory self-efficacy to offloading behavior, we recruited 29 individuals who were referred to a memory clinic and 38 age-matched individuals. We assessed memory capacity using neuropsychological measures, and memory self-efficacy using questionnaires. Inspection behavior was assessed in a copy task that allowed participants to store information to their preferred load or to rely on the external world. Referred individuals had lower capacity scores and lower memory self-efficacy. They inspected as often as controls, but used longer inspections and performed worse. Across all subjects, memory capacity - but not memory self-efficacy - explained inspection frequency and duration, with higher capacity associated with fewer and shorter inspections. Capacity measures thus translate to how people choose to deploy their memory in tasks that do not force full capacity use. However, people generally avoided remembering more than two items per inspection, and thus avoided using their full capacity. Inspection behavior was not further explained by memory self-efficacy, suggesting that inspections are not a sensitive measure of constraints experienced in everyday life. Although we provide support for the predictive value of capacity tasks in tasks with more degrees of freedom, capacity tasks overlook offloading behavior that individuals may employ to avoid using their full memory capacity in everyday life.</p>","PeriodicalId":15382,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology","volume":" ","pages":"1-23"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inspecting the external world: Memory capacity, but not memory self-efficacy, predicts offloading in working memory.\",\"authors\":\"Sanne Böing, Antonia F Ten Brink, Carla Ruis, Zoë A Schielen, Esther Van den Berg, J Matthijs Biesbroek, Tanja C W Nijboer, Stefan Van der Stigchel\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13803395.2024.2447263\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Individuals with memory impairments may need to rely often on the external world (i.e. offloading). By memorizing only a fraction of the items at hand, and repeatedly looking back to the remainder of items (i.e. inspecting), they can avoid frailty or effortful memory use. However, individuals with subjective concerns may also prefer to rely on the external world even though their capacity is intact. Crucially, capacity assessment fails to recognize offloading strategies, while inspection assessment may reveal how people choose to deploy memory in everyday life. To disentangle the relative contributions of memory capacity and memory self-efficacy to offloading behavior, we recruited 29 individuals who were referred to a memory clinic and 38 age-matched individuals. We assessed memory capacity using neuropsychological measures, and memory self-efficacy using questionnaires. Inspection behavior was assessed in a copy task that allowed participants to store information to their preferred load or to rely on the external world. Referred individuals had lower capacity scores and lower memory self-efficacy. They inspected as often as controls, but used longer inspections and performed worse. Across all subjects, memory capacity - but not memory self-efficacy - explained inspection frequency and duration, with higher capacity associated with fewer and shorter inspections. Capacity measures thus translate to how people choose to deploy their memory in tasks that do not force full capacity use. However, people generally avoided remembering more than two items per inspection, and thus avoided using their full capacity. Inspection behavior was not further explained by memory self-efficacy, suggesting that inspections are not a sensitive measure of constraints experienced in everyday life. Although we provide support for the predictive value of capacity tasks in tasks with more degrees of freedom, capacity tasks overlook offloading behavior that individuals may employ to avoid using their full memory capacity in everyday life.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15382,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-23\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2024.2447263\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2024.2447263","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

有记忆障碍的人可能需要经常依赖外部世界(即卸载)。通过只记住手边物品的一小部分,并反复回顾剩余物品(即检查),他们可以避免脆弱或费力的记忆使用。然而,有主观顾虑的个体也可能倾向于依赖外部世界,即使他们的能力是完整的。至关重要的是,容量评估无法识别卸载策略,而检查评估可能会揭示人们在日常生活中如何选择部署内存。为了解开记忆容量和记忆自我效能对卸载行为的相对贡献,我们招募了29名被转介到记忆诊所的个体和38名年龄匹配的个体。我们用神经心理学方法评估记忆容量,用问卷调查评估记忆自我效能。检查行为是在一个复制任务中评估的,该任务允许参与者将信息存储到他们喜欢的负载或依赖外部世界。被推荐个体的能力得分和记忆自我效能都较低。他们检查的频率和对照组一样,但检查时间更长,表现更差。在所有的研究对象中,记忆能力——而不是记忆自我效能——解释了检查的频率和持续时间,记忆能力越强,检查次数越少,时间越短。因此,容量测量可以转化为人们如何选择在不强制使用全部容量的任务中部署他们的内存。然而,人们通常避免每次检查记住两个以上的项目,从而避免使用他们的全部能力。记忆自我效能不能进一步解释检查行为,这表明检查不是日常生活中经历的约束的敏感测量。虽然我们在自由度更高的任务中支持容量任务的预测价值,但容量任务忽略了个体在日常生活中可能采用的卸载行为,以避免使用他们的全部记忆容量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Inspecting the external world: Memory capacity, but not memory self-efficacy, predicts offloading in working memory.

Individuals with memory impairments may need to rely often on the external world (i.e. offloading). By memorizing only a fraction of the items at hand, and repeatedly looking back to the remainder of items (i.e. inspecting), they can avoid frailty or effortful memory use. However, individuals with subjective concerns may also prefer to rely on the external world even though their capacity is intact. Crucially, capacity assessment fails to recognize offloading strategies, while inspection assessment may reveal how people choose to deploy memory in everyday life. To disentangle the relative contributions of memory capacity and memory self-efficacy to offloading behavior, we recruited 29 individuals who were referred to a memory clinic and 38 age-matched individuals. We assessed memory capacity using neuropsychological measures, and memory self-efficacy using questionnaires. Inspection behavior was assessed in a copy task that allowed participants to store information to their preferred load or to rely on the external world. Referred individuals had lower capacity scores and lower memory self-efficacy. They inspected as often as controls, but used longer inspections and performed worse. Across all subjects, memory capacity - but not memory self-efficacy - explained inspection frequency and duration, with higher capacity associated with fewer and shorter inspections. Capacity measures thus translate to how people choose to deploy their memory in tasks that do not force full capacity use. However, people generally avoided remembering more than two items per inspection, and thus avoided using their full capacity. Inspection behavior was not further explained by memory self-efficacy, suggesting that inspections are not a sensitive measure of constraints experienced in everyday life. Although we provide support for the predictive value of capacity tasks in tasks with more degrees of freedom, capacity tasks overlook offloading behavior that individuals may employ to avoid using their full memory capacity in everyday life.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
4.50%
发文量
52
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology ( JCEN) publishes research on the neuropsychological consequences of brain disease, disorders, and dysfunction, and aims to promote the integration of theories, methods, and research findings in clinical and experimental neuropsychology. The primary emphasis of JCEN is to publish original empirical research pertaining to brain-behavior relationships and neuropsychological manifestations of brain disease. Theoretical and methodological papers, critical reviews of content areas, and theoretically-relevant case studies are also welcome.
期刊最新文献
The impact of noise exposure, time pressure, and cognitive load on objective task performance and subjective sensory overload and fatigue. Detecting noncredible symptomology in ADHD evaluations using machine learning. The time has come: discussing the clinical neuropsychology provider's role in cultural respect and inclusion. Analysis of skew, examination of intercorrelations, and determining the optimal threshold for performance invalidity when 10 performance validity tests are administered during a neuropsychological evaluation. The relationship between self-monitoring and cognitive strategy use in midlife and older adults.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1