Working Memory Processes During Abductive Reasoning

Psychological Research-psychologische Forschung, 2021

Abductive reasoning describes the process of deriving an explanation from given observations. The theory of abductive reasoning (TAR; Johnson and Krems, Cognitive Science 25:903-939, 2001) assumes that when information is presented sequentially, new information is integrated into a mental representation, a situation model, the central data structure on which all reasoning processes are based. Because working memory capacity is limited, the question arises how reasoning might change with the amount of information that has to be processed in memory. Thus, we conducted an experiment (N = 34) in which we manipulated whether previous observation information and previously found explanations had to be retrieved from memory or were still visually present. Our results provide evidence that people experience differences in task difficulty when more information has to be retrieved from memory. This is also evident in changes in the mental representation as reflected by eye tracking measures. However, no differences are found between groups in the reasoning outcome. These findings suggest that individuals construct their situation model from both information in memory as well as external memory stores. The complexity of the model depends on the task: when memory demands are high, only relevant information is included. With this compensation strategy, people are able to achieve similar reasoning outcomes even when faced with tasks that are more difficult. This implies that people are able to adapt their strategy to the task in order to keep their reasoning successful.

Experimental Psychology (formerly "Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie"), 2008

In four experiments we test a recall reconstruction hypothesis for working memory, according to which reading span items can be recovered or specified from multiple memory representations. Each reading span experiment involves memoranda either embedded within or unrelated to the sentence content. This manipulation affected the timing of recall, with longer pauses accompanying items that are linked to processing. Levels of recall accuracy vary between these task formats, dependent on the orienting task for processing. Experiment 1 compares the chronometry of spoken recall for word span and reading span, in which participants complete an unfinished sentence. Experiment 2 and 3 confirm recall time differences without using word generation requirements, while Experiments 4 used an item and order response choice paradigm with nonspoken responses. We argue that verbal and manual recall timing offers an informative measure for understanding working memory.

Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 2022

Abductive reasoning visuospatial reasoning working memory eye movements process tracing Abductive reasoning is the process of finding the best explanation for a set of observations. As the number of possible observations and corresponding explanations may be very high, it is commonly accepted that working memory capacity is closely related to successful abductive reasoning. However, the precise relationship between abductive reasoning and working memory capacity remains largely opaque. In a reanalysis of two experiments (N = 59), we first investigated whether reasoning performance is associated with differences in working memory capacity. Second, using eye tracking, we explored the relationship between the facets of working memory and the process of visuospatial reasoning. We used working memory tests of both components (verbal-numerical/spatial) as well as an intelligence measure. Results showed a clear relationship between reasoning accuracy and spatial components as well as intelligence. Process measures suggested that working memory seems to be a limiting factor to reasoning and that looking-back to previously relevant areas is compensating for poor mental models rather than being a sign of a particularly elaborate one. Following, high working memory ability might lead to the use of strategies to optimize the content and complexity of the mental representation on which abductive reasoning is based.

2020

Working memory is now established as a limited capacity system. The debate regarding working memory has been largely between slots and resource based models. The resource model suggests that as the number of items increases, precision of recall decreases because neural resources are dynamically allocate to all the objects needed for task. Slot model on the other hand implies that an item is stored either with the highest precision or not at all. If both these models stand true then quality of memory performance would be near perfect for a single object. However, that may not be the case. In the current work, we investigated recall accuracy for feature(s) of a single object in three successive experiments. In all three experiments, the memory array consisted of a single colored oriented short line presented a short distance away from the center of the display for 1 sec. We probed recall of features from the set of color, location, orientation, and size. In experiment 1 number of recall question varied between 1 − 4 with the order randomized in each trial. In experiment 2 we chose to probe only two feature recall questions, whereas only one recall question was probed for the third experiment. In experiment 3 we varied the delay before the recall probe between 1 and 2 s. The recall response for each feature was mapped on to a continuous variable. Subjects used a color wheel to respond to color, on-screen mouse click to indicate center of the line location, click away from the center to indicate size, and a mouse click to the periphery of centered circle to indicate orientation with the slant of the resulting radial line. We calculated z-scores of errors for each feature for every subject separately. In experiment 1 that for color, location, and size the errors increase significantly with the position of the questions asked. In experiment 2, the errors increased significantly between questions for color and location (but not for orientation and size). In experiment 3, we did not see any significant increase in error with recall probe delay. Overall run-time for each trial was within 10 secs, well within the limits of operation of working memory. This drop in performance poses questions for memory mechanisms proposed by slot and resource models as both would predict near-perfect recall within the time-period for the trials.

Memory & Cognition, 2002

Many classic and current models of recognition memory assume that old/new recognition decisions (i.e., "was this item presented before?") are based on an assessment of unidimensional memory strength, or

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2006

1990

Journal of Experimental Psychology

1976

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2011

In the field of diagnostic reasoning, it has been argued that memory activation can provide the reasoner with a subset of possible explanations from memory that is highly adaptive for the task at hand. However, few studies have experimentally tested this assumption. Even less empirical and theoretical work has investigated how newly incoming observations affect the availability of explanations in memory over time. In this paper we present the results of two experiments in which we address these questions. While participants diagnosed sequentially presented medical symptoms, the availability of potential explanations in memory was measured with an implicit probe reaction time task. The results of the experiments were used to test four quantitative cognitive models. The models share the general assumption that observations can activate and inhibit explanations in memory. They vary with respect to how newly incoming observations affect the availability of explanations over time. The data of both experiments was predicted best by a model in which all observation in working memory have the same potential to activate explanations from long-term memory, and in which these observations do not decay. The results illustrate the power of memory activation processes, and show where additional deliberate reasoning strategies might come into play.