<p>What's answer above summarises many of the first things I would have said. </p>

<p>In addition, you may also want to note that working memory references the idea of a computer, which implies that storage and processing are separable. In fact, storage and processing occur using the same mechanisms in the brain, meaning that a simple concept of working memory is hard to credit. </p>

<p>Also, there is a distinction between the number of objects one can simply remember for a space of time and the number of objects one can operate on at the same time in parallel. This number changes across modalities, so that for audition, you can typically process a single audio stream at a time, however for vision, you can clearly track multiple objects across space (and in fact, if you know anything about the blind spot or peripheral acuity, the brain does a lot of that tracking on inference rather than actual perceived objects). For a good reference on processing vs simple storage and how those concepts dissociate, see <em>Measuring the Influence of Complexity on Relational Reasoning</em> by Birney, Damian P; Halford, Graeme S; Andrews, Glenda.</p>

<p>Another important issue is that WM usually refers to a specific sort of processing that occurs consciously. But behind those straightforward stores that we have conscious access to lie a vast complexity of sub conscious processing in each modality. The way that the brain tracks objects in the visual system for example, is relatively well understood, but far more complex than these higher level cognitive concepts of working memory that people talk about so nonchalantly. I'm taking your definition of working memory to be the conscious stuff, but there is a great deal of what I would term sub conscious working memory behind these processes too, that I'm not mentioning here for brevity.</p>

<p>I guess the key message is that there are as many measures of WM as there are definitions of it, and there are a substantial number of studies already examining the effect of different stimuli on ability to recall items. As well as the ability to recall however, WM also implies ability to operate on the items recalled (we might think of this in terms of bandwidth vs storage), which is something that perhaps you may have missed in simply talking about capacity.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-04-26T10:32:44.737Z
For what it's worth, I think this is a much better answer than the rather outdated information in the top-voted answer.
Christian Hummeluhr
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-10-06T12:31:18.003Z
Most of this is self evident and well known, differences between the so called "phonological loop" and "visuo spatial sketchpad" are easy to find, although the analogies that seperation is based on are extremely dodgy IMO. I've added on further reference and some other info.
analystic
CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-10-06T05:42:19.557Z
2012-10-06T12:36:29.480Z
2012-10-06T12:36:29.480Z
analystic
<p>Wilhelm 2013 What is working memory capacity, and how can we measure it?</p>
<p><strong>Complex span tasks (Cspan)</strong></p>
<p>reading span task (Kane et al. 2004)</p>
<p>operation span task</p>
<p>The rotation span task (Shah &amp; Miyake 1996, adapted from Kane et al. 2004)</p>
<p><strong>Updating tasks (Updating) (e.g., Miyake et al., 2000)</strong></p>
<p>The verbal updating task</p>
<p>In the numerical updating task</p>
<p>the spatial-figural updating task</p>
<p><strong>Recall 1-back (RNb) (Dobbs and Rule, 1989)</strong></p>
<p><strong>Binding tasks (Binding)</strong></p>
<p>the letter-color binding task</p>
<p>the word-number binding task</p>
<p><strong>Secondary memory tasks (SM)</strong></p>
<p>the word-word SM task</p>
<p>the letter-position SM task</p>
<p><strong>Reasoning tasks (Gf)</strong></p>
<p>the fluid intelligence section of the Berlin Test of Fluid and Crystallized</p>
<p>Intelligence (BEFKI; Wilhelm et al., 2013).</p>
<p><strong>Tasks measuring response inhibition (Inhibition)</strong></p>
<p>the Eriksen Flanker (E) task</p>
<p>the Simon (S) task.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-08-31T16:05:40.010Z
2015-08-31T16:05:40.010Z
2020-06-17T09:55:31.633Z
user9212
<p>The capacity of human working memory is subject to individual differences. The number of items or chunks a person can retain in their memory may, have profound effects on a variety of other cognitive processes, such as problem solving. </p>

<p>I have come across a couple of ways to measure working memory such as the delayed match-to-sample task, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-back" rel="noreferrer">Dual N-back task</a> or the <a href="http://psychcorp.pearsonassessments.com/haiweb/cultures/en-us/productdetail.htm?pid=015-8895-800" rel="noreferrer">Wechsler Memory Scale</a>. For the latter I have been unable to find out whether it offers an estimate of the number of items which can be held in working memory. This, however, is precisely what I am interested in. I know that the capacity measured using verbal stimuli is affected by a variety of features of the material.</p>

<p>Therefore, I'm wondering <strong>what are the most commonly used methods to measure an healthy individual's working memory capacity</strong>. Also, <strong>is there a reliable measure that can be easily used in online research?</strong> I am also interested in measures suitable for laboratory research, though. Finally, <strong>are abstract visual material and digits more "pure" measures than verbal ones?</strong></p>

<p><em>I am especially interested in standardized procedures with known reliability measuring working memory and giving an estimate of the number of chunks an individual can retain.</em></p>

<memory><measurement><working-memory><short-term-memory>
How to reliably measure working memory capacity?
crsh
# How to reliably measure working memory capacity?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2012-09-20)

The capacity of human working memory is subject to individual differences. The number of items or chunks a person can retain in their memory may, have profound effects on a variety of other cognitive processes, such as problem solving.

I have come across a couple of ways to measure working memory such as the delayed match-to-sample task, [Dual N-back task](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-back) or the [Wechsler Memory Scale](http://psychcorp.pearsonassessments.com/haiweb/cultures/en-us/productdetail.htm?pid=015-8895-800). For the latter I have been unable to find out whether it offers an estimate of the number of items which can be held in working memory. This, however, is precisely what I am interested in. I know that the capacity measured using verbal stimuli is affected by a variety of features of the material.

Therefore, I'm wondering **what are the most commonly used methods to measure an healthy individual's working memory capacity**. Also, **is there a reliable measure that can be easily used in online research?** I am also interested in measures suitable for laboratory research, though. Finally, **are abstract visual material and digits more "pure" measures than verbal ones?**

*I am especially interested in standardized procedures with known reliability measuring working memory and giving an estimate of the number of chunks an individual can retain.*

**Tags:** memory, measurement, working-memory, short-term-memory


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2012-10-06. Score: 8

What's answer above summarises many of the first things I would have said.

In addition, you may also want to note that working memory references the idea of a computer, which implies that storage and processing are separable. In fact, storage and processing occur using the same mechanisms in the brain, meaning that a simple concept of working memory is hard to credit.

Also, there is a distinction between the number of objects one can simply remember for a space of time and the number of objects one can operate on at the same time in parallel. This number changes across modalities, so that for audition, you can typically process a single audio stream at a time, however for vision, you can clearly track multiple objects across space (and in fact, if you know anything about the blind spot or peripheral acuity, the brain does a lot of that tracking on inference rather than actual perceived objects). For a good reference on processing vs simple storage and how those concepts dissociate, see *Measuring the Influence of Complexity on Relational Reasoning* by Birney, Damian P; Halford, Graeme S; Andrews, Glenda.

Another important issue is that WM usually refers to a specific sort of processing that occurs consciously. But behind those straightforward stores that we have conscious access to lie a vast complexity of sub conscious processing in each modality. The way that the brain tracks objects in the visual system for example, is relatively well understood, but far more complex than these higher level cognitive concepts of working memory that people talk about so nonchalantly. I'm taking your definition of working memory to be the conscious stuff, but there is a great deal of what I would term sub conscious working memory behind these processes too, that I'm not mentioning here for brevity.

I guess the key message is that there are as many measures of WM as there are definitions of it, and there are a substantial number of studies already examining the effect of different stimuli on ability to recall items. As well as the ability to recall however, WM also implies ability to operate on the items recalled (we might think of this in terms of bandwidth vs storage), which is something that perhaps you may have missed in simply talking about capacity.

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Most of this is self evident and well known, differences between the so called "phonological loop" and "visuo spatial sketchpad" are easy to find, although the analogies that seperation is based on are extremely dodgy IMO. I've added on further reference and some other info.  
> **username_2**: For what it's worth, I think this is a much better answer than the rather outdated information in the top-voted answer.  

---

### Answer by username_3 on 2015-08-31. Score: 4

Wilhelm 2013 What is working memory capacity, and how can we measure it?

**Complex span tasks (Cspan)**

reading span task (Kane et al. 2004)

operation span task

The rotation span task (Shah & Miyake 1996, adapted from Kane et al. 2004)

**Updating tasks (Updating) (e.g., Miyake et al., 2000)**

The verbal updating task

In the numerical updating task

the spatial-figural updating task

**Recall 1-back (RNb) (Dobbs and Rule, 1989)**

**Binding tasks (Binding)**

the letter-color binding task

the word-number binding task

**Secondary memory tasks (SM)**

the word-word SM task

the letter-position SM task

**Reasoning tasks (Gf)**

the fluid intelligence section of the Berlin Test of Fluid and Crystallized

Intelligence (BEFKI; Wilhelm et al., 2013).

**Tasks measuring response inhibition (Inhibition)**

the Eriksen Flanker (E) task

the Simon (S) task.


---

