English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

The time-based resource-sharing model of working memory assumes that memory traces suffer from a time-related decay when attention is occupied by concurrent activities. Using complex continuous span tasks in which temporal parameters are carefully controlled, P. Barrouillet, S. Bernardin, S. Portrat, E. Vergauwe, &amp; V. Camos (2007) recently provided evidence that any increase in time of the processing component of these tasks results in lower recall performance. However, K. Oberauer and R. Kliegl (2006) pointed out that, in this paradigm, increased processing times are accompanied by a corollary decrease of the remaining time during which attention is available to refresh memory traces. As a consequence, the main determinant of recall performance in complex span tasks would not be the duration of attentional capture inducing time-related decay, as Barrouillet et al. (2007) claimed, but the time available to repair memory traces, and thus would be compatible with an interference account of forgetting. The authors demonstrate here that even when the time available to refresh memory traces is kept constant, increasing the processing time still results in poorer recall, confirming that time-related decay is the source of forgetting within working memory.

Time-related decay or interference-based forgetting in working memory?