DTIC ADA419467: Working Memory Influences on Long-Term Memory and Comprehension

1.4 MB·English

by  Defense Technical Information Center

ARI Contractor Report 2004-02

Working Memory Influences
on Long-Term Memory and Comprehension

Gabriel A. Radvansky
University of Notre Dame

“This rpart ie pblisve to meet legal and cnrtractual requiremants and may net
meat ART eciantfic or professional standards for publication

January 2004
United States Army Ressarch Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

‘Approved or publis lease; dition ie site,
REPORT TOCUMINITATION PAGE

ansary 2008 Final Sune 1360 ~ une 2002
‘Working Memory Influences on Leng-Term Mmreny ad DaswWoI-£0-4-0901 .
CComp:ehension ‘2, PROGRUP ELFEN MABE
. 11028 .
2 AOR ‘e FROIECT HUME
ane -

Gabel A Radvonses : .

. 2a01 -
PRE ORONG ORGAN ZATION aS) ANT AE SPS {PERFOR avd ORGANVATION REPORT WUMBER

enh 20040130 031

4, SPONSURINGRIONTTORING AGENCY NAzae() anid ADDRESSES) 9, MONITOR area

E. Aemy Raseatch neue forthe Gehatioral and Soe
Uhe'Army Rater nos fe eho and Sot a

5001 Ehsenhower Avena
ATT: one alte
‘scardie, vaczzmaaa

Gontratar Repert 2004-02

1, RSTRIGUTIONVAILABIITY VATEMIENT
_Apatoved for puoi release; cstbuticr is unite

‘This reportie publishd lo moet legal and contractual requiremaris and may nct meet ARTs scien o: professional
sancands for puiomion|

1 THAR 286

Trig projact was conducted with te alm of underetandig the role of working merr ory n thecomprehensicn
and lorg-termn retention of avrt-spectfic information, This study locked at haw comprehersion and memory
pracessing af the mental rrodel level i related to tvactional measures of worklng memory capacty, including
the wotd span, reading span, e2eratior spar, and spetial spen tests. Issucs of certicular interest were the
ably to ramemioer avert descriptors, tre detection and memory of functional retations the dalseton ct
inconsistencies, sensivity te causal cannectviy. anc! memoy for surface form, tortbasa and stustion
specific centant. Athaugh tradtional working mernory span treasures were rslated to a few cf out tes, the
relation was primariy confined to the faxtbase level of processing, Ths was ltl evidence that traditonat
measures of working mamary span were direct refaled ta processing at the mental model level. A

‘comprehension memory capscty semory spar tes

_SeOUTY LASSEN ‘.unarzrionor |. mower | 21 ncononsieLcecnoon
ie rcport rr. ansmmact | 15 THsrace | Paul Gade

Un

fiod Uneuisaed | Undead | Unita a 703-517-8
Abstract

‘This project was camel acted with he alm of understanding the rule of wosking memory in
te comprehension and long-tera cetemion of event-saccifie informatics. This suuly foaked at
how co-nprehensicn und mentary processing at che mental muni leve: is wlated to taditional
‘monaires a working memory capacity inching the word span, reading span, operatior. span,
an spatial span t2%3. Isues of perticular interest were the ability to remearber event
‘lescriptons, the devection and memory of lietional relations. the defection «Zinconsistercies,
sensitivigy te causal connectivity, an memory for surtsec foun, texthase and sitaation-specific
content, Although trltional worcng memory spau measures were reluted 10 a few of our txts,
the rlstion was primarily contiaed to the texthaso level ef processing. There wins lite evidence
tht radtivnat aveanares af working memory span were ditecty relator to processing athe
rental model level
Working Memory Inilucroes on Long-Term Memory and Coy

An ineportant nocd fer effecive Thinking and reasoning is far comples sets of inforenation
ahout the world to be readily understacd by people. To understana ‘nferenavicn well a person
Inst be able to successflly eomnprelind the nacnre of tke events that are being referted to by the
‘descriptions that have been provided. The siraple reteition of a collection of *ndividual pieces of
jnferriation is insufficient, A pen: roast be able ta properly relate that information to extennal
circumstances, Lhis prjuet sought to assess how au individuals cognitive siliies can be wsod 10
prodict thir cure perfarnsance on conaprehension and long-ferm memory tasks and to develop
methods oF mining. that are ailor mad to sn individual weaknesses. Tis project focused am
‘working memory influences on highcr-level coraprehension, and the Jonge-tenin raemries thal
resull rom this comprehension (often called mnectal models because they are mental simaletions
‘ofa set of circumstances thul vould exist in che world). Working mer-ory ik chat portion of
cognicion where information is actively mauiputated, This project ssested the deprec to which
the suncessful processing of meatal madels are predicted by tradilicmal measures of cognitive
willy, oe van be beter predicted by meawares aimed crore directly at how these myprentatiens
ate crested aud retioved, This is impantant because our knowledge shout events inthe world
relics more on th mental mulls we create than on lower Ievel representations, sach as
propositic:sl cles.

Tongesuale stadies

‘One ccmsitentclaira teem research ou werking memory is that people wie have a layer
working menaocy' capacity are better st largange comprebexniom and memory (c2 Dansinan &
Merikle, 1996). Hovicver, many of these studies have net looted atthe inslvence of eapacity om
‘ental model processing, Mental mxdels (van Dif & Kintsch, 1988; 7 nan & Radvansky,
1998; Jobmson-.aird, 1983) are complex: mara representsions thal van sinnulatedeseribed
Situations. Becuuse mental model processing requires ‘he aotive cxanipolatian of infeunation,
‘working memezy is intxcatsly invelved. Mow is the processing znformntion a! the menial mode:
Jevel is affocted hy individual dierences i. working memory,

‘When people understand Language. thoy ereate fuse fypes a representations. ‘hese are
the surfuce rn, the extbase, and the utental model (van Dijk & Kiatsch, 1983). Yae sueface
form is 9 vechatio representation th i relatively shon-lived (Sachs, 1967). At a deeper love is
‘he texthase. Ths i an abstract ropresentaion of Ine idea uns, or propositions. The textbuse is
vote durable, and can be mone easily rttieved trom memory, Finslly, further removed is th>
‘ental model. This i & regmesentation of the sitgation eserihel hy a fex, not the ext self
(Glonheng, Meyer & Vinee, 1986). The focus here ws op several aspects of mental model
processing, including the processing and remunberiny; of fumetional relations, the detcotion of
ince simencies, and memory for information shout a daserihed event. We assossed inclivichel
differences using tradsional menaurss 0° vork’ng memory capaci

‘Working memory capucty

‘Working memory is often operationalized in terms of eapucity or “span” "That i, the
purnher af items that cai be lick ovo" @ period a time silt tbe additional load ofa srecl tas,
sul ns reading o¢salving math prosiems, There are a munber of studies rating working
‘mernory span to Jeoguage comprohension and reeniory. The basis idea is that people with greater
‘working ntemory capacity ure hetee at a mumiber of cmprchensioa and snemory tasks. What
‘working memory spans acl.aTly measure is 8 maticr of sorte debare (see Miyake, 2001). The
traditional view is that span scores reflect Low much infirmnation a person can u-sintain daring
processing, This sssumes some sort of resource raeiophor (Baleley, 1986). Others have
suggested thut span scores rele attentional camiral mechanisms, such as inhibition (Cor way &
ingle, 1994; Kane, Bleckley, Couway & Engle, 2001) of the management of interference
‘Tanti, May , de Hashcr, 2001: May, Kane & Haste, 1999), Regaidless of the view Laken, the
acum in working memory spa mesures on the cetention of certain vleraents daring active
processing.

‘A mumber of working memery span tests have beca develepell, The most baste are simple
casks, such as digit spon or word ayan, Jn theso tasks, acople wre given sets of ters (hc.
‘digits or words, rospeetively) and are cested ta soe what i the largest set size that can be: rece
‘Danenaan ne Merkle (1996) have shown chat the worl span is w superior mcesure of langage
processing over the digi span, Beeause ovr concern is wilh Tanguage comprehrsion wa
rmesnory, we Jacus 0a the Weve span. More recently, The focus lias been op mensures that include
“a pocessing tsk in addition to the need 10 hold a sot of isms in memory. Tasks with both
processing and storage components ate rferrod to ns omaplan span tasks. We consider Shree
sich tasks here. Oni ofthe moro poflar is the Daneman and Carpenter (198M) readine spna lest.
“This is tegatded as a measure af working memory span for lang:auge pracessing. In this task
poople real aloutl a ser of sentences, sch a8 “His head sat or is shoulders like a pear om a
ish" After each ser, people ste to report heck dhe las word of cach of the sentences in the mast
recent set, Performance on this reasure is cotrolated with a numberof measures of Tanguags
processing andl msmery (see Daneman & Merkle, 1996 fora review),

‘Another measnie isthe operation span test, developed by Turaer and bogs (1989). This
tank las been promoted as being more domain independcrt, Kor this measure, people are given a
‘we operation math profleia (e.g, (7x 1)+ 8= 16) slong witha word (eg, horse). Lhe prabiem
apd solutiom ure read atoud and! the person inlisutes whether the salntion js co:teet oF mo. Then
the word is read afoud. At the onl af each se, a person cocalls as miny ofthe wards [rors chat sot
vs ey can, Performance em this wweasnce has Bocn iclated to binge processing (e-., Engh.
Cantar & Carll, 1992) and memory retrieval ou, Cantor &: Enste, 1993)

‘Moce cevently, Shah ané Miyake (1996) have developed a spatia) spam test that is aimed
rane a the processing and revnfion of spatial infoumation, Ic srueture ofthis testis modeled
ater the reading span fet. I thi test peoale arc presoited with w series of votated letexs ith the
ask of indigating whether each is normal or mirror reverse. ler eech se, the potson reports
che otion vf the top of each Ice (emang righ equally spaced locations lnid am: ina eile) in
che muss recent sel Pecformnanc: on his tex. has been selated to spatial language pracessing
(Friedman & Miyake, 2600),

‘Thote is no question that working memory spon is rested lo compcehension and memery.
However, amos! ull ofthis research has foccssd on Ire surface forts andor toxtase levels
‘Studies looking at memory for specific words, lexical access, and vocabulary ability are simed at
the surface form. Ln addition, sturics hooking ac memory for propesitiol eonteml, paraphresicg
ability, and following directims ure aimed a he textbase Jove. For sles ia ue standardized
tests, these ofton emphusize the surlace form, toxtbase, 0° general sarld knowledge. With the
notable exexpian nfm slu‘y by Friodman and Miyake {2000%, which is detailed inthe genera)
lisevasiom, there have been very few studics that have Tpoked al working memory eapacity and
ite elation to peovessing that primarily involves the mental maodel level

‘ne of these few sudics was dene by Lee-Sarmons ané Waitucy (1991) who compared
‘menoey span (as mcasnred by the operation spar: rest) with perfomance on 4 memory paradigm
developed by Andersen nnd Pichert (1978). This paradigm tests bow coater perspective offects
text memony, $3eificaly, pep ead a lext that gave a descrigtion of « house, Talo! the
people were asked ta mal fram the perspective af home buyer. nné hal from the pe-spective of
a burgh, After raiding, people were given ta roel tests, The fiat simply asked peop'e to
seca the text. Inportntly, onthe sccand zcow), pouple were avkel tw adopt ether the otig:nal or
an alternative perspective, Recalls were scared based on their propositional content. Spat bad uo
influenee an mensoey when there was no shift in perspective. TTowever, when there was a shift,
the yremter a pe:son’s span scoto, the more propositions that Were recaled,

“This stay is interesting because perspective is mere a quality ofthe mental model, One
‘nterpeecation i chat poople ith greater spum were betler able switch perspectives and
recover knowledge tha is mere pertinent te huilding a new mental mode. If. this would
<demeustate that working memuny capscily i elated to mental anode] processing. Troweree, its
not ofcar that a perszective shidt deoessarlly results in people creating & neve sivuatior: model. It
may only serve o discredit the original model, Lf, papple woutd be less likely to se the
‘meaal model during recsll wid rely mare ent he texTbuse. Dnder tes eixcumstances these
remus would reflect differences in mersory Ibe the textbase, not the mental mex

ter suggestive studies have looked at inference verification, Work hy Dixon, LeFewe,
and Tilley (1988) and Masson and Miller (1983) comparcll performance on a nureber of
Tengunge processig and working memory tasks. The language tasks of orast interest hers hed
people verity inferences that cequire both information Irom the text along with gered world
novwledge (Dexa et a.) oF the combinatioa of ext elements (Masson & Miller), Perfrmmance in
these studies as plated to eeading span scores, However, itis impor‘ant to note that these
reading span tests doparsd from the standard Danernaa and Cargenter (1980) tes, Rather than
simply reading the sentences, people also indicated whether the sentences unde sense (Dixon et
al or performed u clove trl for Tagncered sentences (Masson & Miller) These tests require
sore exmplex processing that might invalwo menial models, whereas sioply reading aloud may
not As su, it isunclear the degra whieh these iasks measure Working emery cxpRELy aS
it has beon operationalized.

Mentat model nse

This section comsilers a nunsber of mental medel processing rveasures. This inchndes
memory for yonenil event descriptions, the comprcaension andl meranry of Tunetienal aspects of
ator, the evectian a situational inconsistencies. the influence of causal canmectvity on
real'ng, nad enemory for situation specific information.

‘Sitnotion Ieutificstion. Ae stated earlier, a mental model represcuts the sitvtion
desorbed by a (ext rhe tex ise: Whew usl:ig mental mode's to make memory decisions,
people are able to identify inlimmasion tha: is consistaut witha proviously deseribee situation
‘ovoh if at explicit formation had never boon encounter! helore. Semmetimes using mental
‘mls 16 guide memory can rerait in people selveting inForatcm that is vonsisteac with a
previous description instead ef selecting the gorunl deseription (e-g,, Gamnbats, 1981; Radvansky.
Gerard, Zacks, & Hacher, 1994), Kor our purposes, we wanted a method that rsquized people ta
use mental models ts identify statements that er> consistent sth previous descriptions but
which have not been zead before, To this und, we use a situation <dentiation fest in which
people first read a series of scerences, Aficrward, people were aresented with a fein which they
‘were to select ore of six options thal best described the same situation as the original sentence,
‘The ab:ity to da this was used us a measure of mental model memory use

1 workng remory spin is related to avental mode! processing, peuple with higher span
scores showld have highor situation identification scores, Hsving geete> eapacity would allow
‘hem to encode au! stare infomiation in Jong-tourm mcmary more elTectively a general. This
would be reflectel im an increased ability o remember what sas read eaelier are reason throwels
‘which of the alwernatives best matched the criginal

Tonetioagliry. An important role ofthe mental anode isto eprescer the Function
relations ameng entities, Fonetiral relations ure these that iavalve tho meaningful inleraction
Delween ecttics and which save to define the event. These talatiors offen convey a typical
‘nleraction between twa entities, wich as belween a hammer and a mail. However, it may be
possible fora fincticnal relation to be atypical, suel ae using # rock lv panel a nail. These
typical, but functional, selavins are identified only iter. is pewsible forthe entities to
smsnningFully iacernc, ypieally bassd on the aiferdunces of the estities fo one another ¢e..
Glenberg, 1997). Fruetional relat‘ans nee iraportant for metnal model processing, Pepe Ting it
easiee o encode and remembe” fur ional as compared to nonfimetional spats] relacions
‘Sadvansky & Copeland, 200K) ln addition, poople ae sble ty iceatify plemures of objects more
{quickly when the orientation of the pictured object mulred haw an object was descnibed as
Cinetioning ina particular conteat (Stanfield & Zwaan, 2001).

If working momery capacity is related @ mantal mode! processing, » reasonable
expectation i that people with higher span sooics will show larger duneticmality eects. Theit
[grr capacity would allay dent to agcess and use more fformation ftom long-form memory
With mine informacion available about the referents i the text, ic would be easier to note hw
The elements in a situstion ats incracting, Thus, high spau people would be ina hetter pewiioa to
take advantage of funciional relations

Inconsistencies, Ka person earapcehends a text sufficiont'y, any imewnsistencies Dat re
prosont shonld he noticed. People ate sensitive to tuational Encanstsrencies. kn a study O'Firien
su] AThrecht (1982) people read toxis in which The lecatian ofa hatacter was described. Por
‘exaraple, a sentence night be “A Kien stood insida‘outsice the alth club ahs fell Ii
Shngp)sh” where Kirn's fncation is vasied between condicons. A luter senlence in te text woule
be “She dade to yrulsige and suctel ber Ings a lic", TO%im was initially described es
being imide, this seeand seateace would be eamsinten! with dhe previously desexibed sitnation.
However, if she was altcady ontyie the health club, cis second ssutence woul he incansistent
swith te deserihed evens, Retin: Fans far clitivedsencouces ate slower a the inconsistent thst
the consistent condition. People can be sensitive othe infernal consinuency of the described
situation

‘Working memory span may be involved in this process with people with lager capacities
showing yreater inconsistency cffects, The detection af inconsistencies requires a persom ts have
avoileble both the curcen information in the text, and the information frew she eurier portion of
the text chat makes if imeonsisien. The greater a person's working memory spau, the tore likely
th:s infonmalion wuld be available.

‘Causal Conneetivity. Ous of the cherseteristes af described situations that is not
explicily conveyed in ce strustare of y text ilsel are causal relations “There ix some variably
in the degree to whieh von elements ace causally relared to enc another, This is elerred 1 as
ceasal conoetivity, The mame causal ectaneetions there ate che grsater te eonmectivily. Causal
‘connectivity infiensss ecrrprchension and memory. Spcctically, mfermalion hal is inceprated
inte the eausal chin of events, ak is higher in causal connectivity. is beer rememibeted
(Trabasso & van den Proek, 1985), and is rated as being more import! Teubasso & Sperry
1965), The current stuly uses an appueach in which -he stomentn ole wnt, stich as elaases or
seanenoes, are fink caded in terms af the dogrce of causal womnetivity. Then reading tenes for
‘hese clemenus ace analyzed in arogression analysis wih the nuirbes of cansal sonncetions asa
predic vaniable,

If working momory spin is involved in thi process, people with knger sapucties will
show a greater lunes of causal cnmectiviry. To be infliesecd! by causal ecrmectivily eequires
tata person hve wvailable thowe previous portions of “he test fot ure caus relevant co the
Jngormation thaw enrently being read, Ihe greater a person’s wotking memory span, tbe =nore
likely this information is available,

‘Memory for Event Specific Information. As describe eaier, poopie typically creme
lhree levels of isproscutation ~the surface farm, tke textbase, aad the situetion wsdel. People
may vary inthe depres to whch they eenphasize these different representainms. As seh, it
makes sense fo separate aut these components using a method develope by Schmalheifer and
Glavanov (1986). Jn this paradigm, people soad a fext and aro then given 0 series of probe
sentence, The task i fo indicate wetter a senterice wax eeu belive. There are four classes of
rrabes: verbatims, paraphrasc, inferonees, and incorrects. Using signal dereetion analysis, the
rale oF cesponding "yes" to ce-ch ofthese prabe types cea be sed detsrmine the strength af the
thuoe rearesentational Tevels (se the mealliod section fora score dettTal lesr'ption of this
precess),

sandy

‘Traditional measures of working memory span are slated to comprehieusion ar memory
al dhe surface form and texthes: levels. However, the relation to the moaral model level fs not
clear. Itmay be ‘hat werking memory span iss gencral-purposs escures, IF se, «me would
‘expect itt be related lo mente] madel processing as well, The yrenter mie capacity, the bette
‘one is able to construct, end dherofore yeenembbe a ciherent mental model of the described
‘exerts, Allecantivoly, it may bo thet trafione’ mexsures of working memory san are more
<onfited to surface farm smd lexthase levels of compvebeasion hd memory, ancl aks ne have a
scrong, civeat relation to the mental model level

Moiked

Porticiunis

‘We tested 160 pacts. These people wese drawn tiom the subetpols the
CGrivesity of Note Dume on Intiana Cavsersity South Bond and sore reimburse with partial
clas srodi, AD were mative English speacers. The data freen one person was excluded for having
4 sinenrem iden Fcalio. soot at chance (4 opt of 24) a8 well as very short reading thus,
“agent that he was not actualy reading the sori
‘Materials and process

‘Mamory span fea, There were fonr tests of wouk-ng memory expacty. The most base
‘vas a word sun es Tor this tent, people were prescated wha sores of wondsin ever
incceasing set snes af'3 tH, with 3 sos at cach st siz, and an aliitional 3 prctice tras at set
sine 3, Thu words were prevented one ata tims on a compuler seneen for | seach. Ace end of
each set a series of question warrkn was displayed, ore for cach item in thy set. The task wes to
recall the words in the ordcr that hey were presented. People respite hy Lying their
responses into the computer. People typed "DK" ("Don't Know") fr thove items they could not
recall. The order of the wands wun rundomized for each participant,

or the Daneman anil Carpenter (930) reading spax tes peopl were presented with a
scris of genkentes in ever inuceasing set of 2 0 6, wt sets at ench se nize, exvept for set size
six, for which there were oaly throo sets, The somionees were pretenued on a eourputer sere ad
the tisk was lo read each settence alond, After finishing each sentence, the experimenter
ichameei to the nex sentence oy aressng the space bee. When a Mlank sereen appeared, the task
‘wa to recall Ie fil wind fron each ofthe sentenecs in the current set. The experimenter typed
these responses inls he computer. Again, peaple were cneewuped to real: these in the order
thal they were presented. The otder ofthe sentences was randinnized for exch participant.

‘For the Turner and Shale (1983) operation span test peuple wert prescated with a seview
of math problems followed by @ word, such ax"(9X1) 19" then "BOAT" in ever inerening
sets of 2 to, with 3 sets tench wet size, except for set size 2, for whch there were 6 sets (the
first thrve were consideret practice}. The problems and words were presenled on a computes
soreea, nd the lash was (o read cach problora aloud end indicate whether the answer was comet
hy pressing oge af wo buttons on acormpuler mouse, aad dheu read the word kn. When
Dink sercen appre, he lnk was to recall the wards from that set, The experimenter typed
there responses inte te computer. Agrin, pouple were enecuraced to recal: these ia the onder in
which they were presented, The order of the problems and words was random:70 for exch
person,

Forthe Slinh und Miyake (1996) spetil span test poople were presented with a series of
rotate letters (ie. PJ, LP, & R) bn over increasing sets of? lo 6, with 5 sets at each set size,
exvept fer only 3 at set size 6, hs lotors were display on index caids, and the processing. task
sas to state whether the leer wns normal cr mieroe-enaged, "lhe responses were resured by the
experimenter, fier each se, a 03cd was preseuted with cight leeations mapped out around a
ticle at 45 degree intervals (0 degrees, or yrighl, sus rever used). The task was to indicate the
position of dhe top of the letters in the corve7t at i the ender in which they were enecuntens
Note chat the sare Iceation ws never repeated within a sat. The experimenter revardel these
responses Pople vam: oncouraged to guess they were unsure.

For the scaring oF al ofthe span tsts ifs st wos Toellad enrrectly, then the sbore was
equal ln the number of words in that sot ‘he Hoorex forall af The costetly rezatlod scts were
hen totaled (Conway &e Engl, 1994},

‘Situation identification test. Tn this task, people were given a scties of 24 xemtences,
‘which were chim Sram or inspired by those matorils used by Garam (1981). These semrences
‘were presimied one at 9 ime on a computer sercen. During thik “nial resentetion, the tsk was
tele the sentences for pleasantness, Responses were entered into the computer sng a1 to
seale, wilh liadicatiag “exemtely unpleasant” el? indivating "extreme:y pleasant” Because
Uhis wee a cover task, these ratings were not recone.

After all hs sentences wens rales, peuple were given « surprise idendificntion task. On
each trial, six alternatives were presented which were varictions ofthe original sentance. These
sin altemsatives were prosenlud, in a random. order on eacit teal for exch person. The tank was fa
select th item shat must closely described the samo stustion asthe sewlenice red anc raled
catlicr, Penple were informed ‘hat che original sentences would naver appear cud to type their
enponses into ke computer. No feodback was provided. The six alvematives were (a) alread
prepanitional pluas, (b) slecasd divectohject, (c) altered verb, (A) altered prepositional phrase
tunel diel ject, () altered prepesitional phrase and verb, and (f altered drew! objet and verb.
An example of ax sentences for the original sentonce "Ihe mn lost a band of poige atthe card
shark's." ara prosemted below. Sentence 2 is the correct response.

1. ke rman Jost hand of poker like the card shark.

2, The rmun last sore mouey at the ce shark’,

53. The man won a hand of poker al the card shar’.

44. The man Jost scune money Hike the card sae,

5. ke man vin 4 hon of poker like the catd sherk.

1 The man won some rooney atthe card shat’

Renging and memory task. For this study peogle were asked to read a series ofcight
narrative. Theve sloees wore 31 to 43 sentences in length (M * 38). An exammate af one af these
ents presented an the Appendix, These sures were presented one clause ata fime oa a PC.-
cenmapatible computer in white on ablaek ackground. People pressed a epuce bar with dei let
hand to advance to the nest clause. Reading times were collected, Poa rent theic right hand
‘on the computer mouse ts revaond 10 “he comprehension questions at the end oF esch story. The
Jef barton ws marked wth a "Y" Jor “yes” and che right burn wes mused with an "N" for
"go A nunaher sf measures were gathered dering story reading. There were also a few memory
measures thar were presented using paper and pencil alter all of the stories wen: mead. We will
disenss each of these in turn,

Fungliomalits. To assess sensitivity o fmefional relations, each story contained two
semfenves that descuibed a spatial reletign. Por two af the stovies, both of the relations were
finet.onal, For two stores, huth were nontacctioral, Finally, for four stories cme vas functional
a the other nonfunctionat, The conbinations af candirions to stories we totated act08s
participants, To dlustate the difference herween the functional and nonfunctional versio, inthe
story in the Appendis, Ihe lunetional version was "David wae standing below an old buidge "
‘Thi x fametional bacacse allows Davi fo get put ofthe sain. The nonfmetional version was
"David was standing usxt to « lamppon.” Tais is ouunctional Boeause this spacial zelaion plays
ino ole in the story. Tn ell eases, the functional version was chanel Ib a noeTunetionat version
by altering hth the spatial zelaton and the reference ubjec”. Te assess wheather functionality ad
un effect au sontpuchension, we nsed the reading time for chese sentences. Prowious renearch has
shuren thae Faneticnal sextences are ead mare quickly thas noxéantional senlenves (Radvansky
& Copeland, 2600}. Premmably, people are inficencsl by hav well the informadon fits in the
caosol chain of tbe described events,

Tnadditon, after people had tad all af the series they were given a reengnitinn Les for
\his functional infoanation, People were presented with ezch origina) sentence with three
Aistrators, Ine disiacinns alert dhe located abject inthe sentence, rhe xpaal relation betwecn,
the two or boih. Fareaursple, i the origina semtevee wax "Dusid was landing below an old
bridge’ he cs.racton sentences would bs "Davie was nunding next an old bridge." "David
was standing below a lemppast." "David was slang next to a lamppost. ‘Thus, the funetional
vad nonfanet.onal versions ware alwwuyx presect. These options were ranclomized and the order in
‘which the various trials noe red was also randomized, Poopls rospamndad by ciecling the ‘eter
next to cech eamtenes (2b, 2, oF d) tha they thought comresponil! to Hhe sentence they had read
carlicr.

Inconsistency, To assess incarsistesuy deletion, i te tents were trae sentences that
‘Sescrihed actions that wcrecither eonsisten! br inconsisten: withthe earceat location, Pach sory