New rule use drives the relation between working memory capacity and Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices.
Abstract
The correlation between individual differences in working memory capacity and performance on the Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (RAPM) is well documented yet poorly understood. The present work proposes a new explanation: that the need to use a new combination of rules on RAPM problems drives the relation between performance and working memory capacity scores. Evidence for this account is supported by an item-based analysis of performance during standard administration of the RAPM and an experiment that manipulates the need to use new rule combinations across 2 subsets of RAPM items. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved).
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Working memory is one of the core processes that drives fluid intelligence and other higher cognitive abilities.
“One of the core processes driving Gf, as well as other higher cognitive abilities, is WM (Wiley, Jarosz, Cushen, & Colflesh, 2011).”
From Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis (2015) · cites this paper as Wiley, Jarosz, Cushen, & Colflesh, 2011
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 28 · Cited by 99
- Authors
- Wiley, J., Jarosz, A. F., Cushen, P. J., & Colflesh, G. J. H.
- Affiliations
- University of Illinois Chicago (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
- Published
- 2011
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 256-263
- ISSN
- 0278-7393 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1285
- OpenAlex
- W1973701509
- Cited by
- 99
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 12.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (REC 0347887)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
- Keywords
- working memory capacity, Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices, rule use, rule combination, individual differences, fluid intelligence
- MeSH terms
- Adaptation, Psychological, Female, Humans, Intelligence Tests, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Neuropsychological Tests, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Photic Stimulation, Predictive Value of Tests, Problem Solving, Regression Analysis, Statistics as Topic, Students, Universities
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
