The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Individual differences in working memory and comprehension: A test of four hypotheses.
Abstract
A relationship has consistently been found between measures of working memory and reading comprehension. Four hypotheses for this relationship were tested in 3 experiments. In the first 2 experiments, a moving window procedure was used to present the operation-word and reading span tasks. High- and low-span subjects did not differentially trade off time on the elements of the tasks and the to-be-remembered word. Furthermore, the correlation between span and comprehension was undiminished when the viewing times were partialed out. Experiment 3 compared a traditional experimenter-paced simple word-span and a subject-paced span in their relationship with comprehension. The experimenter-paced word-span correlated with comprehension but the subject-paced span did not. The results of all 3 experiments support a general capacity explanation for the relationship between working memory and comprehension.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“As in experiment 1, performance on the OSpan task measures the attentional resources available to the individual on a moment-to-moment basis (Engle et al. 1992).”
From Brain Drain: The Mere Presence of One’s Own Smartphone Reduces Available Cognitive Capacity (2017) · cites this paper as Engle et al. 1992
In the citing paper
“Performance on the OSpan assesses the domaingeneral attentional resources ' available to the individual on a moment-to-moment basis ' (Engle et al. 1992).”
From Brain Drain: The Mere Presence of One’s Own Smartphone Reduces Available Cognitive Capacity (2017) · cites this paper as Engle et al. 1992
Citations
Cites
Human Memory: A Proposed System and its Control Processes
Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968) · Psychology of Learning and Motivation · doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(08)60422-3 · Cited by 7,216
Anderson, J. R. (2013) · doi:10.4324/9781315799438 · Cited by 6,761
Individual differences in working memory and reading
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980) · Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(80)90312-6 · Cited by 6,336
A capacity theory of comprehension: individual differences in working memory
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1992) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.99.1.122 · Cited by 4,153
A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.87.4.329 · Cited by 3,904
Language and Thought of the Child
Piaget, J. (2005) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203992739 · Cited by 2,662
The two disciplines of scientific psychology.
Cronbach, L. J. (1957) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/h0043943 · Cited by 2,590
The Language and Thought of the Child
Weber, C. O., Piaget, J., & Warden, M. (1927) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1415214 · Cited by 2,335
Is working memory capacity task dependent?
Turner, M. L., & Engle, R. W. (1989) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/0749-596x(89)90040-5 · Cited by 2,299
Self-citationCowan, N. (1988) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.104.2.163 · Cited by 1,918
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ericsson, K. A., & Kintsch, W. (1995) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.102.2.211 · Cited by 3,498
Working memory, short-term memory, and general fluid intelligence: A latent-variable approach.
Engle, R. W., Tuholski, S. W., Laughlin, J. E., & Conway, A. R. A. (1999) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.128.3.309 · Cited by 3,078
Self-citationWorking memory span tasks: A methodological review and user’s guide
Conway, A. R. A., Kane, M. J., Bunting, M. F., Hambrick, D. Z., Wilhelm, O., & Engle, R. W. (2005) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/bf03196772 · Cited by 2,882
Self-citationWorking Memory Capacity as Executive Attention
Engle, R. W. (2002) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00160 · Cited by 2,507
Self-citationModels of Working Memory: Mechanisms of Active Maintenance and Executive Control
Miyake, A., & Shah, P. (1999) · Cited by 2,404
Metadata
- Authors
- Engle, R. W., Cantor, J., & Carullo, J. J.
- Affiliations
- University of South Carolina (US)
- ORCID
- Engle, Randall W.
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
- Published
- 1992
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 972-992
- ISSN
- 0278-7393 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1285
- OpenAlex
- W2045491217
- Cited by
- 626
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 26
- FWCI
- 14.14
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Keywords
- working memory, reading comprehension, word span, operation span, individual differences, viewing time
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Attention, Humans, Individuality, Memory, Short-Term, Reaction Time, Reading, Mental Recall, Retention, 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
