CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 238Cognitive Abilities and TestingChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

Working Memory Maturation: Can We Get at the Essence of Cognitive Growth?

Open access
Cowan, Nelson·2016·Perspectives on Psychological Science
DOI 10.1177/1745691615621279PMC PMC4800832
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The theoretical and practical understanding of cognitive development depends on working memory, the limited information temporarily accessible for such daily activities as language processing and problem solving. In this article, I assess many possible reasons that working memory performance improves with development. A first glance at the literature leads to the weird impression that working memory capacity reaches adult levels during infancy but then regresses during childhood. In place of that unlikely explanation, I consider how infant studies may lead to overestimates of capacity if one neglects supports that the tasks provide, compared with adult-level tasks. Further development of working memory during the school years is also considered. Many investigators have come to suspect that working memory capacity may be constant after infancy because of various factors such as developmental increases in knowledge, filtering out of irrelevant distractions, encoding and rehearsal strategies, and pattern formation. With each of these factors controlled, though, working memory still improves during the school years. Suggestions are made for research to bridge the gap between infant and child developmental research, to understand the focus and control of attention in working memory and how these skills develop, and to pinpoint the nature of capacity and its development from infancy forward.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This review argues that working memory improves from infancy through the school years, but the apparent adult-like capacity in infancy likely reflects task supports rather than true capacity. It concludes that controlling knowledge, filtering, encoding, rehearsal, and context does not eliminate childhood working-memory gains, leaving capacity growth and attention-control growth as unresolved alternatives.

Key findings

  • Working memory performance improves steadily from 4 to 15 years across many span and complex-span tasks (Gathercole et al., 2004; Figure 1).
  • Infant studies suggest 10-month-olds can detect changes in 4-item arrays but not 5-item arrays, and 8-month-olds remember two unique objects with novelty looking around .60; however, these may overestimate capacity because infant procedures provide supports such as familiarity comparison.
  • With confounds controlled, age differences remain: for 8 unrelated sentences, chunk access increased from about 2.5 chunks in first-grade children to about 3.5 chunks in adults, and visual array capacity improved across grades for both English letters and unfamiliar characters.
  • The review cannot decide whether development is due to increased capacity (number of chunks/slots) or improved attention control/maintenance; both remain viable.

Methods

  • Narrative/theoretical review of behavioral and developmental working memory literature, covering infancy and the school years.
  • Reanalyzes published means (e.g., Gathercole et al., 2004, Table 1) to estimate number of items recalled, and compares studies that control knowledge, filtering, encoding/consolidation, rehearsal, and context.
  • Uses capacity estimates such as Cowan’s k = S(h − f) and reviews infant looking/search procedures.

Limitations

  • Stated: the capacity-growth hypothesis can seem like a “glorified null hypothesis”; the fundamental question of whether infants and adults have equivalent capacity cannot yet be answered; infant and child procedures are not directly comparable and need bridging research.
  • Stated: infant procedures may overestimate capacity by neglecting task supports, while adult-like procedures may impose greater deliberate maintenance/control demands.
  • Evident: as a review, it reports no new primary data and relies on cross-study comparisons; many conclusions depend on interpreting disparate tasks and age groups.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1745691615621279

Cites

191 of 191 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 129 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingcitation

    In a reanalysis of means from Gathercole et al. (2004), performance improved steadily from 4 to 15 years.

    “Clearly, there is a steady improvement in performance from 4-15 years.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gathercole et al. (2004)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Findingcitation

    In the Gathercole et al. (2004) data, the developmental trend is similar across most tests.

    “The developmental trend is similar across tests, except in two cases (visual pattern span and mazes), in which developing grouping processes may steepen the age trend as older children recode items to form a”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gathercole et al. (2004)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Findingcitation

    In Cowan et al. (2010), strategic filtering broke down when the number of array objects was increased to three circles and three triangles.

    “There was evidence in Cowan et al. (2010), however, that the strategic filtering broke down when the number of array objects was increased to three circles and three triangles.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cowan et al. (2010)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Findingcitation

    With those children omitted, the interaction between materials and age group was eliminated.

    “With those children omitted, the interaction between materials and age group was eliminated.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cowan, Ricker et al. (2015)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Findingcitation

    Cowan et al. (2010) found that the number of items of a shape included in working memory varied systematically with the attention condition: the more likely a shape would be tested, the more attention was allocated to it.

    “It was found that the number of items of a shape included in working memory varied systematically with the attention condition: the more likely it was that a shape would be tested, the more attention was allocated to it.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cowan et al. (2010)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims. 40
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 2
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 23

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    In the studies shown in Figure 5, adults yield estimates of the number of items stored in working memory that exceed estimates for children 6-9 years old, while a measure of processing efficiency does not differ between the age groups in the tasks used.

    “The top panel of the figure shows that, in all of the studies noted, there is evidence that adults yield estimates of the number of items stored in working memory that exceed the estimates for the children.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    In Cowan, Ricker et al. (2015), performance was higher for English letters than for unfamiliar characters and climbed more quickly across age groups.

    “It was true that performance was higher for English letters than for unfamiliar characters and climbed more quickly across age groups; knowledge contributed to performance profoundly.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cowan, Ricker et al. (2015)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    In Cowan, Ricker et al. (2015), performance improved across age groups for both English letters and unfamiliar characters.

    “The initial result was that performance improved across age groups for both types of materials.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cowan, Ricker et al. (2015)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Gold et al. (2006) found that schizophrenic participants were as good as control participants at allocating attention, but remembered far fewer bars overall.

    “Surprisingly, schizophrenic participants were as good as control participants at allocating attention, but nevertheless remembered far fewer bars overall.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gold et al. (2006)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Morey and Cowan (2004) found that recitation of the participant's own 7-digit telephone number during the retention interval had no effect on performance, whereas recitation from memory of a just-seen random 7-digit number did interfere with memory for the visual array.

    “Morey and Cowan (2004) showed this by administering an array memory task with several different secondary tasks during the retention interval between the array of colored squares and the test probe. Recitation of the participant’s own 7-digit telephone number during the retention interval had no effect on performance, whereas recitation from memory of a just-seen random 7-digit number did”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Morey and Cowan (2004)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Cowan, Saults, and Morey (2006) found that suppression in adults made the pattern change strikingly to match the children's pattern, but adults' results nevertheless occurred at a somewhat higher performance level.

    “Cowan, Saults, and Morey (2006) found effects of suppression less vulnerable to the psychometric concerns because a complex pattern of results differed between 9-10-year old children versus adults. Suppression in the adults made the pattern change strikingly to match the children’s pattern, but the adults’ results nevertheless occurred at a somewhat higher performance level.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cowan, Saults, and Morey (2006)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The pattern of development was essentially the same in each condition: there was no age difference in the allocation of attention that favored the 80%-tested shape over the 20%-tested shape, but there was a large developmental increase in the number of items in working memory.

    “The pattern of development was essentially the same in each condition: there was no age difference in the allocation of attention that favored the 80%-tested shape over the 20%-tested shape, but there was a large developmental increase in the number of items in working memory.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cowan, AuBuchon et al. (2011)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Children who were 5 years old showed the same pattern only when the task required that the picture names be pronounced or when the experimenter pronounced the names.

    “Children who were 5 years old showed the same pattern only when the task required that the picture names be pronounced or when the experimenter pronounced the names.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hitch et al. (1991)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Many aspects of cognition depend on a child's working memory abilities and are impaired in children with learning or processing challenges affecting language, reading, mathematics, and problem-solving.

    “Many aspects of cognition vary depending on the working memory abilities of the child, and are compromised in children with various learning or processing challenges that can affect language comprehension and production, reading, mathematics, and problem-solving”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Cowan, Elliott et al., 2005

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Cowan, 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Cowan & Alloway, 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    Dempster's findings imply that better chunking accounted for most of the age-related change.

    “suggesting that most of the developmental change came from improvements in chunking efficiency.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dempster (1978)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Dempster (1978) reported a 24% span gain for digits across elementary school, but only a 5% gain for a specially built word set with low word-to-word associations.

    “Dempster (1978) created word series with low word-to-word association values to limit chunking. Whereas digits yielded a 24% increase in span during the elementary school years, the specially-constructed word set yielded only a 5% increase”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Dempster (1978)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationcitation

    One can regard choosing and carrying out a strategy as relying on working memory capacity.

    “Even when children varied in their strategies for approaching a problem (e.g., Siegler, 1994), strategy selection and execution could be thought of as dependent on working memory capacity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Siegler, 1994

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Neo-Piagetian theorists proposed that basic information-processing parameters, such as memory and processing efficiency, become better as children mature.

    “Such findings were handled more gracefully by neo-Piagetian psychologists, who posited that fundamental information processing parameters like memory and processing efficiency improved with maturation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Burtis (1982) reported that although the chunking manipulation worked at every age, it left age differences in performance intact.

    “The chunking manipulation was successful at all ages but nevertheless did not diminish age differences in performance.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Burtis (1982)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Capacity growth may underlie not only memory changes but also conceptual, behavioral, and strategic development in infancy and early childhood.

    “The neo-Piagetian view would promote the idea that the growth of capacity is involved even in the conceptual, behavioral, and strategic changes that occur during infancy and early childhood”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    These infant-child differences are substantial, need an account, and earlier work has not resolved them.

    “These are not trivial discrepancies and they require explanation; they have not been reconciled in previous work.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Performance on conceptual tests was affected by how complex the task was and by its memory demands, known as horizontal décalage.

    “Task complexity and the memory requirements of the task clearly influenced performance on conceptual tests, a phenomenon called horizontal décalage (Piaget, 1977).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Piaget, 1977

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    For visual pattern span and mazes, older children's grouping may make the age-related improvement steeper as they recode items into a spatial pattern.

    “The developmental trend is similar across tests, except in two cases (visual pattern span and mazes), in which developing grouping processes may steepen the age trend as older children recode items to form a”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Several related items could be merged into one chunk.

    “A complex item might be converted to more than one chunk, whereas multiple, potentially related items might be combined into a single chunk.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Improved information processing was said to make it possible to grasp more complex concepts and solve more difficult problems.

    “Better information processing in turn was said to allow more complex concepts to be comprehended, harder problems to be solved, and so on”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Burtis, 1982

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Case, 1985, 1995

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Fischer, 1980

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A promising strategy is at first effortful and attention-grabbing; with practice it requires less attention and helps performance more.

    “The initial employment of a strategy that has promise may at first be cumbersome and attention-demanding, given that it is different from what the participant is used to but, with practice, the strategy can become less attention-demanding, and thus more helpful to performance (a change that has been documented for verbal rehearsal by Guttentag, 1984).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Guttentag, 1984

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Object-file representations are basic, and their object details are filled in with maturation during infancy.

    “The progression of infant findings suggests that object-file representations are quite basic but that the details of these objects are filled in with maturation in infancy.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Deliberate actions including head-turning, eye movements, manual movements, and speech emanate from the focus of attention.

    “Presumably, deliberate actions that include head-turning or eye movements as well as manual movements and speech all emanate from the focus of attention.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Two-year-olds failed to show knowledge of the ball's location in the reaching task, but they passed the looking-time surprise test.

    “Nevertheless, these toddlers did pass the surprise test measured by looking time as in the infant procedure (Hood, Cole-Davies, & Dias, 2003; Mash, Novak, Berthier, & Keen, 2006).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Hood, Cole-Davies, & Dias, 2003

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Mash, Novak, Berthier, & Keen, 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Infant procedures may not elicit the deliberate route to the same degree as adult procedures.

    “As I will discuss, the infant procedures may not elicit the deliberate route to the same degree as the adult procedures.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    In the automatic route to action, incoming stimulation that is discrepant from the neural model of prior stimulation attracts attention, even for stimuli with no prior attention.

    “In the first, the automatic route to action, incoming stimulation is seen to be discrepant from the neural model of prior stimulation, and it attracts attention. This can occur for stimuli for which there was no prior attention.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In individuals older than about 6 years, the focus of attention rapidly circulates to refresh various items in turn, and the number of recalled items is reduced linearly with cognitive load.

    “there is considerable work suggesting that in individuals older than about 6 years of age, the focus of attention rapidly circulates to refresh various items in turn. The number of items that can be recalled is reduced in a linear fashion as a function of the cognitive load”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Barrouillet, Portrat, & Camos, 2011

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    When given adult-like tasks, early elementary school children appear to recall fewer items than infants do.

    “This point needs careful scrutiny because children in the early elementary school years, tested with the adult-like procedures, seem to remember fewer items.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The breadth of attention is said to be distinct from attentional control or executive processes, while activated memory resides in association areas.

    “Neurally and behaviorally the scope of attention, highly dependent on parietal areas of the brain, is said to be separate from the control of attention or central executive processes, highly dependent on frontal areas, with activated memory in various association areas (Cowan, 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cowan, 2011

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    In that usage, working memory is meant to be capacity-limited.

    “It is in that sense that working memory is explicitly supposed to have a limited capacity.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Baddeley & Hitch, 1974

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The embedded process model posits an activated subset of long-term memory and a focus of attention as two kinds of working memory.

    “two different kinds of working memory described by Cowan (1988, 1999, 2005) are used, namely the activated subset of long-term memory, and the focus of attention”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cowan (1988, 1999, 2005)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In the deliberate route to action, attention is governed by central executive processes, and this route can override the automatic route to control head and eye movements even in infants.

    “Second, in the deliberate route to action, attention is governed by central executive processes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Johnson, 1995

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Infants and young children cannot adequately use the deliberate system to separate the stimulus stream into discrete events, only some of which should motivate the response.

    “However, infants and young children would not be able to use the deliberate system adequately to separate the stimulus stream into discrete events, only some of which should be used to motivate the response”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Kibbe and Leslie (2011) found that 6-month-olds were surprised when an object was missing after occlusion but not when the wrong object appeared.

    “Kibbe and Leslie (2011) found that when infants of 6 months see two objects disappear behind occluders, they are surprised when an occluder is raised and the object is missing, but not when the object that appears is the wrong one”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kibbe and Leslie (2011)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Either infants retained an average of slightly under 2 items in working memory, or they used a different process to decide when to stop withdrawing objects.

    “We can conclude that either the infants in fact retained an average of slightly under 2 items in working memory, or else a different process was used by the infants to determine when to stop withdrawing objects from the box.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Miller (1956) described a fundamental working memory limit of roughly seven items.

    “Miller (1956) famously discussed the fact that there is a basic limitation in the capability of working memory, to about 7 items.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Miller (1956)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Cowan, Johnson, and Saults (2005) found little proactive interference with lists of 3 or 4 items, but much more with lists of 6 or 8 items that presumably could not be held in focus.

    “With lists of 3 or 4 items, short enough to be held in the focus of attention, there was very little incorrect responding on the basis of the recent lure (i.e., very little proactive interference), but much more proactive interference was obtained with longer lists of 6 or 8 items that presumably could not be held in focus.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cowan, Johnson, and Saults (2005)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The correspondence between 10-month-olds' 4-item performance and adult capacity could be coincidental because adults' capacity is closer to 3 items and infants are not suspected to exceed adults.

    “The correspondence with adults’ capacity could be a coincidence, inasmuch as adults appear to have a capacity that actually reaches an asymptotic level closer to 3 items”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted).

    Interpretationcitation

    According to the control hypothesis, the difference between infant and adult procedures is not in how many items can co-exist in core working memory, but in how appropriately contents can be controlled and correct memoranda maintained as stimuli change.

    “According to another hypothesis, the proposed difference between infant and adult procedures is not in how many items can co-exist in the core part of working memory, but in how appropriately the contents can be controlled (cf. Kane & Engle, 2003), and thus the correct memoranda maintained, as the stimuli change across the experimental trial.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kane & Engle, 2003

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted).

    Interpretationcitation

    The childhood developmental trend in working memory could occur because young children are deficient in the deliberate process of preserving items in the focus of attention while comparing them to a probe.

    “The developmental trend in working memory that we have seen during childhood could occur because young children are deficient compared to adults in the deliberate process of preserving items in the focus of attention while comparing them to the probe item.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The Zosh and Feigenson pattern can be understood if the focus of attention can include 3 items in these infants; a fourth identical item replaces one in focus, the infant is satisfied with 3 items even if they differ from the originally encoded set, and no direct comparison is carried out.

    “The pattern observed by Zosh and Feigenson (2015), in the procedure in which objects are hidden in a box and can be retrieved by the infant, also can be understood in the embedded-process view if the focus of attention can include 3 items in these infants.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Zosh and Feigenson (2015)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Even 6-month-olds have rudimentary multiple-object representations that do not include details of individual objects.

    “The implication is that even 6-month-old children have rudimentary multiple-object representations, but not including the details of the individual objects.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    According to the information-maintenance hypothesis, infants of 8 or 9 months can already focus attention on 3 items and establish corresponding feature activation in memory.

    “According to this information-maintenance hypothesis, infants of 8 or 9 months are already able to focus attention on 3 items and establish the corresponding activation of their features in memory.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    An item as complex as a Chinese character or a colored shape might take several chunks.

    “A complex item like a Chinese character or colored shape may require multiple chunks.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Case et al. (1982) found that recall of spoken English words and speed of repetition were poorer in children 3-6 years old than in young adults; when adults received unfamiliar nonsense words, their performance resembled children with English words.

    “They examined the ability to recall lists of ordinary, spoken, English words, and the speed of repetition of individual words within the set, finding both measures to be poorer in the children 3-6 years old than in young adults. However, when adults received unfamiliar nonsense words instead of English words, their performance on both measures resembled the children with English word stimuli.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Case et al. (1982)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Camos and Barrouillet (2011) found that at age 6 and below the cognitive load relation did not hold; information was lost as a function of time rather than cognitive load.

    “Camos and Barrouillet (2011) found, moreover, that at age 6 and below the cognitive load relation did not hold and, instead, information was lost as a function of time rather than cognitive load”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Camos and Barrouillet (2011)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    If the similarity in apparent working memory capacity of infants and adults is borne out, then there is no room to anticipate developmental changes in capacity during childhood; development would instead relate to how children handle adult-like task demands, presumably control of working memory contents.

    “If the similarity in apparent working memory capacity of infants and adults is born out, then there is no room to anticipate developmental changes in capacity during childhood. Instead, the childhood development would have to be related to how children handle the additional demands that the adult-like procedures entail (presumably, control of working memory contents).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The operational efficiency of working memory increases with familiarity with the materials, presumably accounting for the developmental increase in working memory performance.

    “This finding suggested that the operational efficiency of working memory increases with familiarity with the materials, presumably accounting for the developmental increase in working memory performance.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Vogel et al. (2005) found that low-span adults did not filter out irrelevant items when arrays were presented and showed a pattern similar for 2 relevant + 2 irrelevant and 4 relevant alone.

    “In contrast, low-span adults apparently did not filter out the irrelevant items when the arrays were presented and showed a pattern of brain activity that was similar for, on one hand, 2 relevant items presented along with 2 irrelevant items and, on the other hand, 4 relevant items presented alone.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Vogel et al. (2005)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Gilchrist et al. (2009) tested children in Grades 1 and 6 and adults with spoken sentences combined into lists that did not tell a coherent story; chunk integrity was about .80 in each age group, and chunk access showed a developmental change.

    “That measure showed about .80 chunk integrity in each age group, so the developmental improvement in memory could not be explained by a change across age groups in chunk integrity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gilchrist, Cowan, and Naveh-Benjamin (2009)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Refreshing rate is a major basis of age differences in working memory and could be the basis of controlled memory maintenance.

    “This finding suggests that refreshing rate is a major basis of age differences in working memory, and it could be the basis of controlled memory maintenance.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Chi (1978) showed that children expert at chess were better able to remember chess board configurations than naive adults, even though the usual adult superiority emerged for digit lists.

    “Chi (1978) showed that knowledge is critically important for working memory. Children (third through eighth grade, mean age 10.5 years) who were expert at chess were better able to remember chess board configurations than were naive adults, even though the usual adult superiority emerged for memory of lists of digits.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Chi (1978)

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The speed of encoding or consolidation cannot explain the age difference in the number of items stored in working memory in this procedure; the pattern of results was unchanged by the slow, serial presentation.

    “It does not appear that the speed of encoding or consolidation can explain the age difference in the number of items stored in working memory in this procedure; the pattern of results was unchanged by the slow, serial presentation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Older participants have a more precise representation of the spatial layout of the studied array, and this extra context helps them locate items and makes the contextual markers unnecessary to identify a probe object's location in the array.

    “Apparently, older participants have a more precise representation of the spatial layout of the studied array, and this extra context helps them locate items in the array and makes the contextual markers unnecessary to identify a probe object’s location in the array (cf. Burnett Heyes et al., 2012).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Burnett Heyes et al., 2012

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Although spatial configuration does improve with development, there is an important component of visual working memory development that cannot be attributed to configuration.

    “In sum, although spatial configuration does improve with development, there is an important component of visual working memory development that cannot be attributed to configuration.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Processing and storage shared a resource but processing efficiency was the result of a working memory difference between age groups, not the direct cause of one.

    “Thus, processing and storage shared a resource but processing efficiency was the result of a working memory difference between age groups, not the direct cause of one”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cusack, Lehmann, Veldsman, & Mitchell, 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The array is not transformed to a verbal form for retention, but both the visual array and a random 7-digit number require a common pool of attention for their retention.

    “This was taken as evidence that the array is not transformed to a verbal form for retention, but that both the visual array and a random 7-digit number require a common pool of attention for their retention (for related evidence of a common attentional resource for verbal and visual processing, see Vergauwe et al., 2009).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Vergauwe et al., 2009

      Not checked in the free run.

57 of 57

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Many processes probably play some role in working memory performance.

    “there is less concern here about which processes play some role in performance, and more of an assumption that many such processes probably do so.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Manual responses in preverbal infants can be deliberate and based on central executive processes.

    “it is assumed here that manual responses in preverbal infants also can be deliberate and based on central executive processes”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    In the adult array change-detection procedure, memory can be accumulated across more than one trial.

    “if we assume that memory can be accumulated across more than one trial”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    In Gilchrist et al. (2009), each sentence would typically be represented as a single chunk, but sentence-long chunks would be retained separately in working memory.

    “It was supposed that each sentence would typically be represented as a single chunk, but that the sentence-long chunks would be retained separately in working memory.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    On most trials in the Zosh and Feigenson procedure, 3 items are in working memory.

    “On most trials in which it is assumed that 3 items are in working memory”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    An individual has k items in working memory on each trial; if the array item at the probed location is in working memory, the individual knows whether the probe differs from the corresponding array item; if the item is not known, the participant must guess.

    “The formula was based on the assumption that an individual has k items in working memory on each trial and, if the array item at the probed location is in working memory, the individual knows whether the probe differs from the corresponding array item. If the item is not known, the participant must guess.”
6 of 6

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 capacity grows from infancy through childhood into adolescence, driven by maturation and knowledge gains.

    “WM capacitythat is, the maximum amount of information that WM can store and manipulate -steadily increases throughout infancy and childhood up to adolescence (Cowan, 2016;Gathercole, Pickering, Ambridge, & Wearing, 2004), both due to maturation and increase in knowledge (Cowan, 2016;Jones, Gobet, & Pine, 2007).”

    From Working memory training in typically developing children: A multilevel meta-analysis (2020) · cites this paper as Cowan, 2016

    In “Development of Working Memory Capacity?” (page unavailable), Cowan reports steady improvement in working-memory test performance from ages 4 to 15; the infant-studies section also describes apparent gains during infancy. But “The Working Memory Capacity Growth Hypothesis” says that a simple increase in capacity across ages remains unproven, while “The Factor of Increasing Knowledge” treats knowledge as a contributor to performance rather than establishing that it increases basic capacity. The claim overstates a steady capacity increase from infancy through adolescence and its proposed causes. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Jiang coauthor's name differs from reference

    Minor

    The in-text citation names the coauthor Olsun, whereas the matching 2000 reference names Olson.

  • Jarrold and Citroën citation year differs from reference

    Minor

    The text cites this work as 2012, while the corresponding reference lists it as 2013.

2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

8 of the 199 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Baddeley A. D., 1986, Working memory
  2. Chi M. T. H., 1978, Children’s thinking: What develops?, 73
  3. Ebbinghaus H., 1913, Ueber das gedächtnis: Untersuchen zur experimentellen psychologie
  4. 10.1073/pnas.0402680101 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Kahn J. V., 1976, American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 80, 663
  6. Marti E., 2012, After Piaget
  7. Pascual-Leone J., 2011, Cognitive development and working memory: From neoPiagetian to cognitive approaches, 13

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Cowan, N.
Affiliations
University of Missouri (US)
Corresponding author
Cowan, Nelson
ORCID
Cowan, Nelson
Venue
Perspectives on Psychological Science
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2016-03
Volume
11
Issue
2
Pages
239-264
ISSN
  • 1745-6916 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-6924
DOI
10.1177/1745691615621279
PMC
PMC4800832
OpenAlex
W2298970181
Semantic Scholar
3bcc44025be345138a8c741256cdfdbfc906e234
Cited by
225
References
199
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 3
FWCI
23.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Perspectives on Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD021338)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
Keywords
working memory, cognitive development, working memory capacity, infancy, childhood, attentional control, pattern formation
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Child Development, Psychology, Child, Child, Preschool, Humans, Infant, Memory, Short-Term

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-08.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-08.

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