Repository logo
 

Even an activated long-term memory system still needs a separate short-term store: A reply to Cowan (2019).

Published version
Peer-reviewed

Type

Article

Change log

Authors

Abstract

In Norris (2017), I explained why the notion of activated LTM (long-term memory) combined with a focus of attention was unable to perform the computations required to support short-term memory (STM) and argued that those extra computations must require a separate STM system. Cowan (2019) made the alternative proposal that this full set of computations is better conceptualized as a unitary system of activated LTM. To this he added a pointer system, the ability to perform variable binding, and an unspecified model of STM that acts as a front end to LTM. This appears to be simply an exercise in relabeling. Furthermore, without a computational specification of how the components work, the model lacks the ability to simulate even the most basic STM phenomena. If the model were specified in more detail it seems almost inevitable that it would contain something instantly recognizable as an STM system. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Description

Keywords

Attention, Humans, Male, Memory, Long-Term, Memory, Short-Term

Journal Title

Psychol Bull

Conference Name

Journal ISSN

0033-2909
1939-1455

Volume Title

145

Publisher

American Psychological Association
Sponsorship
Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00005/11)
This research was supported by grant SUAG/050 from the Medical Research Council of Great Britain.