The DOI matches its Crossref record; 57 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Neurophysiological Measures of Working Memory and Individual Differences in Cognitive Ability and Cognitive Style
Open accessAbstract
The capacity to deliberately control attention in order to hold and manipulate information in working memory is critical to higher cognitive functions. This suggests that between-subject differences in general cognitive ability might be related to observable differences in the activity of brain systems that support working memory and attention control. To test this notion, electroencephalograms were recorded from 80 healthy young adults during spatial working memory tasks. Measures of task-related neurophysiological and behavioral variables were derived from these data and compared to scores on a test battery commonly used to assess general cognitive ability (the WAIS-R). Subjects who scored high on the psychometric test also tended to respond faster in the experimental tasks without any loss of accuracy. The amplitude of the late positive component of the event-related potential was larger in high-ability subjects, and the frontal midline theta component of the EEG signal was also selectively enhanced in this group under conditions of sustained performance and high working memory load. These results suggest that subjects who scored high on the WAIS-R were better able to focus and sustain attention to task performance. Changes in the EEG alpha rhythm in response to manipulations of task practice and load were also examined and compared between frontal and parietal regions. The results indicated that high-ability subjects developed strategies that made relatively greater use of parietal regions, whereas low-ability subjects relied more exclusively on frontal regions. Other analyses indicated that hemispheric asymmetries in alpha band measures distinguish between individuals with relatively high verbal aptitude and those with relatively high nonverbal aptitude. In particular, subjects with a verbal cognitive style tended to make greater use of the left parietal region during task performance, and subjects with a nonverbal style tended to make greater use of the right parietal region. These results help clarify relationships between task-related brain activity and individual differences in cognitive ability and style.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Jackknife, the Bootstrap and Other Resampling Plans
Efron, B. (1982) · Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics eBooks · doi:10.1137/1.9781611970319 · Cited by 8,120
The attention system of the human brain
Posner, M. I., & Petersen, S. E. (1990) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.ne.13.030190.000325 · Cited by 8,070
The Jackknife: The Bootstrap and Other Resampling Plans.
Low, L. Y., & Efron, B. (1983) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2288218 · Cited by 2,702
Circuitry of Primate Prefrontal Cortex and Regulation of Behavior by Representational Memory
Goldman‐Rakic, P. S. (1987) · Comprehensive Physiology · doi:10.1002/cphy.cp010509 · Cited by 1,960
The P300 wave of the human event-related potential
Picton, T. W. (1992) · Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1097/00004691-199210000-00002 · Cited by 1,908
Abilities: Their Structure, Growth, and Action
Jensen, A. R., & Cattell, R. B. (1974) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1422024 · Cited by 1,866
Reasoning ability is (little more than) working-memory capacity?!
Kyllonen, P. C., & Christal, R. E. (1990) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/s0160-2896(05)80012-1 · Cited by 1,810
Topography of Cognition: Parallel Distributed Networks in Primate Association Cortex
Goldman-Rakic, P. S. (1988) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.ne.11.030188.001033 · Cited by 1,660
Carpenter, P. A., Just, M. A., & Shell, P. (1990) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.97.3.404 · Cited by 1,648
Gevins, A. (1997) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/7.4.374 · Cited by 1,623
Self-citation
Cited by
Neurocognitive consequences of sleep deprivation
Goel, N., Rao, H., Durmer, J., & Dinges, D. (2009) · Seminars in Neurology · doi:10.1055/s-0029-1237117 · Cited by 2,154
Learning Styles and Pedagogy in post-16 learning: a systematic and critical review
Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004) · Newcastle University · doi:10.25405/ncl.34085991 · Cited by 1,810
The concurrent validity of the N -back task as a working memory measure
Jaeggi, S. M., Buschkuehl, M., Perrig, W. J., & Meier, B. (2010) · Memory · doi:10.1080/09658211003702171 · Cited by 981
Working memory, attention control, and the N-back task: a question of construct validity
Kane, M. J., Conway, A. R. A., Miura, T. K., & Colflesh, G. J. H. (2007) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.33.3.615 · Cited by 933
Intelligence and neural efficiency
Neubauer, A. C., & Fink, A. (2009) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.04.001 · Cited by 878
Metadata
- Authors
- Gevins, A.
- Venue
- Cerebral Cortex
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2000-09-01
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 829-839
- ISSN
- 1047-3211 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2199
- OpenAlex
- W2128945905
- Cited by
- 599
- References
- 57
- FWCI
- 19.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Neurophysiological Measures of Working Memory and Individual Differences in Cognitive Ability and Cognitive Style. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/cercor/10.9.829
- The paper
- Gevins, A. (2000). Neurophysiological Measures of Working Memory and Individual Differences in Cognitive Ability and Cognitive Style. Cerebral Cortex. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/10.9.829
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.