Cited by 1,307Cognitive Abilities and TestingMemory Processes and InfluencesNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

The nature of individual differences in working memory capacity: Active maintenance in primary memory and controlled search from secondary memory.

Unsworth, Nash, Engle, Randall W.·2007·Psychological Review

Abstract

Studies examining individual differences in working memory capacity have suggested that individuals with low working memory capacities demonstrate impaired performance on a variety of attention and memory tasks compared with individuals with high working memory capacities. This working memory limitation can be conceived of as arising from 2 components: a dynamic attention component (primary memory) and a probabilistic cue-dependent search component (secondary memory). This framework is used to examine previous individual differences studies of working memory capacity, and new evidence is examined on the basis of predictions of the framework to performance on immediate free recall. It is suggested that individual differences in working memory capacity are partially due to the ability to maintain information accessible in primary memory and the ability to search for information from secondary memory.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0033-295x.114.1.104

Cites

192 of 192 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Unsworth, N., & Engle, R. W.
Affiliations
Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
Venue
Psychological Review
Published
2007
Volume
114
Issue
1
Pages
104-132
ISSN
  • 0033-295X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1471
OpenAlex
W2146406172
Cited by
1,307
References
192
Citations by year
2026: 42 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 67 · 2023: 59 · 2022: 52 · 2021: 86 · 2020: 52 · 2019: 68 · 2018: 94 · 2017: 85 · 2016: 96 · 2015: 85 · 2014: 96 · 2013: 83 · 2012: 83
FWCI
63.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
individual differences, working memory capacity, primary memory, secondary memory, active maintenance, attention, memory search
MeSH terms
Attention, Cognition, Cues, Exploratory Behavior, Humans, Memory, Models, Psychological, Psychology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review