While the role played by working memory in the manifestation of intelligence is universally agreed, the same cannot be said of visual working memory (VWM). There is ongoing debate among scholars in this regard, with evidence both for and against the capacity of VWM to reflect “a central limit that is a bottleneck in higher order cognition”. (Cusack, et.al., 2009, p.641) One frequently used method to measure VWM is ‘change detection’. In this experiment, a memo consisting of numerous coloured squares are shown for a small duration. This is done in order to reduce chunking or the piecemeal transfer of items into phonological working memory. Following this, a delay of approximately 1 second is introduced to make sure that sensory representations responsible for iconic memory are perished. This is followed by a probe display. The participant will then be asked to compare the color and position of items in the probe with those in the sample. Using this method, VWM is shown to be an indicator of fluid intelligence and academic performance in both children and adults. (Cusack, et.al., 2009, p.641)
Apart from systematic/scientific methods of finding the role played by WM in the expression of intelligence, there is also the evidence given by educators. Academics in the UK contend that the underperformance of pupils in their school exams could be due to deficient working memory rather than poor intelligence. When a research team from Durham University surveyed more than 3,000 school children, it found that one in ten students across all grade levels suffered from inadequate working memory that undermines their academic performance. But what is troublesome is the fact that teachers are seldom privy to this memory deficiency problem, and instead attribute inattention or lack of intelligence for the students’ failure to learn.
This is where school administrators need to be careful. They should work with children with poor working memory and device suitable intervention programs. Since working memory disposition tends to be inheritable, the education and career prospects of these disadvantaged children can depend on timely intervention. In this context, the Working Memory Rating Scale (WMRS) is a handy tool for educators. For example, the WMRS will help teachers to recognize children who potentially have a working memory deficiency without even subjecting them to a test. Since the WMRS is designed in a checklist format, teachers can assess working memory problems by the scores indicated by the checklist. For example, a high score is a strong indicator of WM problems. They can then proceed to give practical recommendations for these pupils, which include “repetition of instructions, talking in simple short sentences and breaking down tasks into smaller chunks of information.” (McKay, 2008, p.9)
References
Broadway, J. M., & Engle, R. W. (2010). Validating Running Memory Span: Measurement of Working memory Capacity and Links with Fluid Intelligence. Behavior Research Methods, 42(2), 563+.
Cusack, R., Lehmann, M., Veldsman, M., & Mitchell, D. J. (2009). Encoding Strategy and Not Visual Working memory Capacity Correlates with Intelligence. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(4), 641+.
Fukuda, K., Vogel, E., Mayr, U., & Awh, E. (2010). Quantity, Not Quality: the Relationship between Fluid Intelligence and Working memory Capacity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17(5), 673+.
McKay, Neil. A Question of Memory; Poor Recall ‘Affects Learning Ability’. (2008, February 28). The Journal (Newcastle, England), p. 9.
Salthouse, T. A., & Pink, J. E. (2008). Why Is Working memory Related to Fluid Intelligence?. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(2), 364+.
Unsworth, N. (2009). Variation in Working memory Capacity, Fluid Intelligence, and Episodic Recall: a Latent Variable Examination of Differences in the Dynamics of Free Recall. Memory & Cognition, 37(6), 837+.