Working memory components of the Corsi blocks task

TLDR

The study situates its findings within Baddeley and Hitch’s working‑memory model (1974). A computerized Corsi blocks task was used, testing forward and backward recall in single‑task and dual‑task conditions with concurrent articulatory suppression, matrix tapping, random‑interval, or fixed‑interval generation during encoding. Concurrent matrix tapping reduced memory for both short and long sequences, random‑interval generation impaired intermediate and long sequences, fixed‑interval generation had no effect, and articulatory suppression only impaired backward recall for long sequences in Experiment 2 but not in Experiment 3.

Abstract

A computerized version of the Corsi blocks task (Milner, 1971) was assessed for standard forward‐recall order (Experiments 1 and 3) and for reversed‐recall order (Experiments 2 and 3) either in a single‐task or in a dual‐task design combined with articulatory suppression, matrix‐tapping, random‐interval generation or fixed‐interval generation as concurrent tasks during the encoding stage. Concurrent performance of the matrix‐tapping task impaired memory performance for short as well as for longer block sequences. The random‐interval generation task, which loads executive processes, impaired memory performance mainly at intermediate‐ and longer‐sequence lengths, while fixed‐interval generation, which is presumed to put no load on executive processing, did not show any effect. Articulatory suppression did not impair memory performance on forward‐recall order, but it impaired memory for longer sequences in the backward‐recall condition in Experiment 2, but not in Experiment 3. The results are discussed within the context of the working‐memory model of Baddeley and Hitch (1974).