Psychology Assignment: An Article Review on Working Memory
Question
Task: As part of the formal assessment for the program you are required to submit an Advanced Topics in Cognitive Psychology journal article review.
For this psychology assignment you will write a critical review of the following paper:
Kellogg, R. T., Turner, C. E., Whiteford, A. P., &Mertens, A. (2016).The role of working memory in planning and generating written sentences.Journal of Writing Research, 7(3), 397-416.
Answer
Introduction:
As noted in this psychology assignment, forming a concrete and meaningful sentence requires certain grammatical sense to be applied conceptually. For this systematic structuring to be presented in verbal or written sentences one requires using their working memory. The present journal article proposed by Ronald T, Kellogg, Turner, Casey E, Whiteford, Alison P, and Andrew Mertens emphasizes the role played by this working memory. The research paper published from the Saint Louis University of M, USA includes a detailed report about the experiment for testing the working memory capability (Kellogg et al. 2016). There are two contrasting argumentative concepts brought to light related to the importance of working memory. On one side the researchers try to test the limited resource requirement of visual working memory to re-image a past work.Contrastingly, sufficientrequirement for verbal working memory is undeniable for encoding grammatical concepts. Hence, to reach a definite understanding, difficulties related to these two stories are manipulated regarding double dissociation of working memory. The present journal is a clear attempt to differentiate between verbal and visual working memory significance. The experiment is focused upon the college student population to examine the need for verbal working memory when provided with related concepts. It also tests whether visual working memory is demanded when provided with unrelated concepts to the selected subjects.
For producing sentences with inappropriate structure, the temporal dynamics are evaluated with the help of experimentation. Findings from this study help to determine whether planning with the use of unrelated concepts is necessary for visual working memory or not. The entire motive behind the application of working memory is to test whether visual or verbal planning is necessary to translate the ideas for the formation of the sentences (Zalbidea, 2017). Cognitive functions including phonological, grammatical, or orthographic encoding are examined upon the group of 46 students selected as experiment subjects. The importance of working memory to hold sufficient knowledge for transforming into the capacity of writing about any topic or language is analyzed. Whether the effect of manipulation has any critical role in solving problems through retrieval of that knowledge from long-term memory or not gets reflected in the present experiment. Multiple perceptual model frameworks are referred from contrasting schools of thought like phonological loop by Baddeley gives importance to verbal WM storage whereas Kellogg emphasizes visual WM for correct grammatical sense in sentence framing. However, this research paper tries to signify the effect of manipulation to draw a semantic association with WM conceptualization.
Summary:
The purpose of initiating the experiment lies in the testing of working memory capacity interfered with related and unrelated nouns prompted to frame a sentence. On the methodological ground, the experiment is undertaken within professional governance in a controlled condition. The use of the primary quantitative analysis approach is made for the present assessment. This requires responses from selected participants to be gathered for the numerical data evaluation to take place. According to Hebert et al. (2018), sentences are asked to be made in either active or passive voice on the presentation of nouns in a meaningful order. Distractions are included with nouns being prompted to see whether the semantic mind-frame gets influenced among students to help in retrieving knowledge from Working Memory or not. However, in the controlled phase of the experiment, the same participants are exposed to situations free from any distraction or noun prompting interference. Rather than testing the verbal WM, it evaluates the impact of visual WM among the participants for retaining six visual symbols across the memory. The study of sequential order induced during the experiment indicates whether the students need to depend upon their working memory conditions or not.
Taking the procedural course into consideration, the present research experiment makes use of Psychology Software Tools. Yi et al. (2018) suggest that with the use of a 20-item block under visual working memory a simultaneous trial of verbal working memory takes control. The application of SPSS sets up a marker set so that no working memory versus verbal working memory versus visual working memory can be tested. The 46 colleges students selected try to associate and par their working memory process with either related or unrelated words. When exposure to nine digits is made pairing with 60 nouns helps to draw related and unrelated manipulation for interfering with the working memory process.
Better working memory processing is likely triggered with related target noun presentation. However, in a condition where unrelated pairs are established, there are raw frequencies indicated through strong sentence framing ability.
As per Martin, (2021), there are instructions provided to subjects in two phases where active and passive modes are used. Sentences infused with verbs create a sense of action, which is constructed in the first phase. In the second phase, the use of phrases like 'is' and 'was' indicates the sentences to be passive. It is through these trials that 6 digits or non-verbal symbols are used for the recognition test. With the help of the experimental condition setup, the participants press the ESC key rather than typing to frame the sentence.
For the production of the sentences, a mixed analysis approach gets used to derive the results. With the statistical tool of ANOVA, subject variable complexity determines WM task operation. The items are required to be analyzed on random factor analysis upon each participant. With the help of scores denoted by each participant, the average or mean value indicates in each experimental condition. Galbraith &Baaijen, (2018) argues when the responses of participants are signified through ANOVA statistics, the use of item analysis needs to be undertaken. Based on mean values the ANOVA results are indicated. It is found that the length of sentences has a direct interfering impact upon the memory retrieval process of participants. This indicates that complexity within sentences has a critical impact on working memory tasks. The active sentences infused with relatable pairing are highly performed with efficiency. In the case of passive sentences, the contrast of unrelated pairing objects has an adverse impact by slowing down the working memory process.
The findings and interpretations from the experiment indicate that hypothesis of unrelated noun prompted creates ineffective influence upon working memory.
Schwering& MacDonald, (2020) proposes that it is under the unrelated noun pairing that poor accuracy gets reflected in working memory tasks. The encoding depicts the need for visual working memory for writing a complete sentence is much more effective than the use of verbal working memory. The impairment leads to inaccuracy and ultimately disrupts the task of WM. However, when the noun is related the task becomes easier to improve the sentence construction to reflect a strong and supportive working memory process. The encoding process of students is facilitated when the active voice stands consistent with grammatical expectations to complete the sentence. With the passive voice, the sentence generates a slow rate of WM to interfere with disruption to the task.
Evaluation:
Working memory functions are interdependent upon multiple manipulating factors to create direct changes in a person's ability to frame meaningful and correct sentences. The present scholarly research article is an illustration to prove this notion. There are multiple theoretical perspectives used to conceptualize the operative process of working memory dynamism.
According to Salas &Silvente, (2020), one school of thought supports the belief that encoding proper grammar is only consistent with framing accurate sentences when the task gets manipulated with the coherent and related cue. On getting prompted with related nouns the participants are anticipated to reflect better sentence formation and written with coherent working memory function. However, such a belief or thought process is challenged when the related prompting also generates impaired impacts to influence an individual to form an inaccurate sentence. This brings the theoretical conception into question where the complexity of sentence formation creates a different difficulty level to strongly interfere in the sentence formation capability.
As is discussed previously that multiple factors influence simultaneously the working memory capacity, the length and complexity of the sentence are also perceived to be a potential interfering agent. Hence, when two factors apply together, one as facilitating and the other as difficulty agents, the challenging factor seems to have a stronger impact to influence the working memory. Révész, Michel & Lee, (2017) indicates that when the related noun is prompted before participants along with verbal impaired clue, the sentence formation complexity increases to result in inaccurate formation. This practical experiment result is coherent with the theoretical model suggested by Kellogg in 1996 where visual working memory is referred with demand for planning and verbal working memory with grammatical encoding. On a theoretical concept basis, this school of thought and model of Kellogg is critically challenged by contrasting approaches established from Fayol's 1999 model. It not only justifies with definite perceptual understanding but also points out the flaw that lies with the theory of the Kellogg model.
The assumption that dependence of verbal WM upon grammatical encoding and visual WM upon planning is a standardized and static concept is flawed as it changes with time. As a supportive evidence record, Fayol’s theory argues that a certain level of temporal dynamics is necessary before any participant is asked to produce or form a sentence. Hence, Fayol states that if working memory needs to be used as a resource necessity for writing a sentence, the different difficulty levels need to be overpowered. Fayol connects mental capacity with physical speed and states that when excessive demand from working memory is posed from several difficulty levels, the rate of motor response from the writer is natural to experience speed slow-down. Arguably, Martin, (2021) states that this not just provides time for the writer to frame the sentence without flaw but also amplifies the pause duration for motor transcription. However, it is interesting to observe from the present experiment how accurate strategic manipulation helps working memory resources to yield unexpected results.
One major perceptual understanding states that when visual working memory resource is demanded, rapid planning is integrated for memorizing a single chunk of sentence writing. This gets quickly transformed to the demand for grammatical encoding from verbal working memory resources. For example, when cues or prompts related in nature like door and knob are provided to students as participants, it automatically becomes easier to configure meaningful sentences. Rostamian, Fazilatfar&Jabbari, (2018) state that this triggers the semantic content to draw planning through visual working memory. This facilitates a person to integrate simply with grammatical encoding and frame the meaningful sentence by stating that "The knob on the door was hard to turn". If this behavioral activity has to be explained from temporal dynamics perception, the use of verbal WM with the related noun as a prompt is effectually integrated to quickly resolve the problem and produce the sentence by triggering the semantic needs. As a related noun is prompted to conceptualize a single chunk of a sentence, the words facilitated participants to frame the whole expression easily.
There is stark contrast temporal dynamics indicated when unrelated noun gets prompted to participating students within experiment condition. Due to the difficulty levelinduced through complex sentence framing, one noun prompted may lead to slower processing of worker memory of the individual. For example, when unrelated nouns are implied as prompts interfering with the sentence-making process like 'ice' and 'jail', the time taken to process is naturally higher. As per Limpo&Alves, (2018), this indicates that one of the two unrelated nuns is brought at the semantic relationship and integrated with the grammatical encoding process. The other unrelated noun gets disregarded as an interfering agent.
However, in such a case relating the unrelated nouns prompted to make sentences naturally takes more time to develop a semantic relationship with a touch of abstraction. For example, when unrelated concepts like 'ice and 'jail' are connected through one sentence it is framed as "melting quickly in the hot jail". Hence, this reflects how the participants needed to make use of strategies to overcome the interfering manipulations before framing sentences with unrelated noun prompts. Therefore, it is quite evident and obvious for participants to take a longer time to process strategic logic and retrieve verbal working memory resources necessary to frame the sentence with unrelated nouns.
From the experiment, practical observation is developed that working memory has multiple interfering factors to influence the sentence framing capacity of individuals. A definite scientific explanation behind the unrelated noun prompts used to integrate grammatical encoding into a sentence takes less time if the sentence opening strategy is kept ready to apply. Costa et al. (2018) propose that this is surprising to find that such readiness of strategic application helps to take comparatively less time for framing sentences with unrelated nouns than that of related nouns to form the sentence. This naturally poses less demand upon verbal working memory resources as well when the unrelated nouns frame sentences in a single chunk. However, delays are inevitable when unrelated nouns are generally provided as cues to students as participants of an experiment for the first time and they are unprepared. The initiative to form the sentence with contrasting nouns cued during sentence formation. There is working memory inefficiency strongly implied as process time lag necessitates extra time. Li &Roshan, (2019) argues that even the demand of resource from visual working memory makes the process suffer when unrelated nouns are provided. Therefore, it is still a debated issue whether semantic integration takes place for framing a sentence with a single chunk even after taking extra processing time or not. Not just the planning through visual working memory process that takes time, getting triggered to strategize sentence framing initiation is also not integrated within time.
Griffin's temporal dynamism model indicates a definite perceptual framework to contribute to the overall understanding of present experiment findings. This paves the model structure through an incremental approach whereby the use of phonological encoding is emphasized highly. Sung, Eom& Lee, (2018) derived that for the planning to trigger from visual working memory resource, a strong semantic connection is desired. During the provision of unrelated nouns establishing such a link automatically becomes increasingly difficult for the experiment participants. When participant response pattern is identified, the use of incremental encoding is found to be taken place at a slow progress rate. It is therefore anticipated according to Griffin's model framework that initially the grammatical encoding must have helped the sentence formation with unrelated nouns. However, later the application of planning-based semantic relationship would be triggering the visual working memory to support the sentence formation process. VelichkovskyBondarenko&Morosanova, (2019) states that this somewhere strengthens the belief and concept proposed by Kellogg where unrelated nouns are found to have longer processing time to plan the sentence initiation with unrelated nouns than that of related prompts. Hence, the theoretical concept expressed by Griffin may not be effective in the case of unrelated nouns cued. The incremental response pattern is not possible to get triggered when participants are newly introduced to unrelated nouns. Hence, the initiative by typing the first word of a sentence, the time for processing the sentence formation using unrelated nouns may demand greater working memory resources with delayed time.
If assumptions are applied to denote the delay in working memory processing with unrelated nouns in a sentence, linking with semantic planning is likely to be highly difficult. It is rather believed that depending upon grammatical encoding can lead to possible response output through the logical relationship among unrelated nouns. Kintsch, (2018) explains that by taking a logical justification route of explanation for student response pattern, it is accepted that greater time for planning is required for unrelated nouns to initiate the planning process. Hence, rather than initiating to write the sentence, the grammatical encoding with the incremental model is likely to report better-written production.
From the depiction of the response pattern of participating students a consistent interpretation is drawn. Use of conjunction like "and" does not merely facilitate the writer to get some extra time to process their grammatical encoding but also pause for coordinating the two contrasting ideas. To build coherence in ideas, the sentence is usually connected with planning so that semantic content becomes consistent to form a complete sentence.
Contradictory perspectives from Krueger et al. (2020) contribute to the present research investigation with individualistic thought processes. Several investigators create a strong link between grammatical encoding and verbal working memory activities. As the spoken language capability is tested when grammatical encoding takes place, the working memory is found to undertake a difficult route which usually requires a longer time to process. Although the present focus is prioritized upon the written form of sentence preparation, articulation of speech is often referred to by researchers in the same context. When working memory processes are retrieved for re-imaging a visual representation from the past, the encoding capability through simple phrasing is suggested. There is a general delay noticed in speech articulation when a picture is asked to describe through complex phrasing. It also requires the link between syntactic and lexical sentence framing complexity to be established. According to Graham, Harris & Beard, (2019), there is usually a difference of great length noted when sentence nature varies from simple to complex type using same words and contents. The difference in format between "The dog and kite moved above the house" and "The dog moves above the kite and the house" get implied through complex and simple format respectively. This denotes how grammatical encoding helps to facilitate the entire clause to be initiated as a result of using incremental grammatical encoding.
For interpreting the response of the 46 college students as participants, semantic content-based planning becomes a dominant premise. Due to the increase in difficulty levels, the content-related concept needs to be facilitated with related nouns as prompts. For establishing semantic associations a respondent gets positively reinforced when the nouns provided as interfering prompts are interrelated with one another. Kim & Park, (2019) elaborates that for the working memory capacity to be strengthened and facilitated, pulling such grammatical encoding content is necessary. When the written process is especially emphasized for the dynamic management process, there is a need for specific tasks to be carried out. There is a strong correlation established between grammatical encoding and semantic association through planned intervention. From the point of view of Olive 2014, it is indicated how planning and sentence formation can be dependent upon the low grade of the transcript. Salas &Silvente, (2020) arguably state that attention towards working memory requires a high level of visual resource demand and dependence to create strong planning. When the prompted nouns are unrelated, the chunks are found to be integrated with conjunctions or pauses. It is usually the conceptual framing of planned integration that necessitates a sufficient balanced proportion of grammatical encoding as well as planning for the final motor response to be derived as output.
It is through the help of finding a related interpretation that exploration is undertaken through experimental findings in this research paper. Poch&Lembke, (2017) illustrates that the use of related nouns prompted to the students participating in the experiment is indicated to have a positive and rapid impact on the response pattern. This does not only enhance the probability of framing a correct sentence but also produces the sentence in the minimum time required. Not many chunks require effort to be connected to find semantic understanding when the nouns provided are already in relation with one another like Knob and Door. However, when such predictive sentences are formed, the encoding and planning become effortless and all students respond in the quickest time possible. It is contrasting to this idea that unrelated nouns are introduced as interfering manipulations. Sénéchal, Hill &Malette, (2018) reveals that these nouns are found to create contrasting meanings which do not easily bring coherence in the sentence formation process. Therefore, when participants are provided with such difficulty levels through complex sentence preparation, the demand for verbal working memory is natural to rise high. This automatically causes the grammatical encoding to take place strongly. The interplay of grammatical encoding and planning necessitating verbal and visual working memory resources makes direct interaction with temporal dynamics.
From the experiment data findings and interpretation, one construct is extremely clear that producing sentence experiences poor accuracy when dual-task logic is applied. According to Robison &Unsworth, (2017), this naturally raises a common concern whether to depend on the visual or verbal domain of working memory to frame the sentence inaccurate manner. The results depicted from participant responses in the experiment indicate that planning before sentence construction is more disrupted when the complexity and difficulty are embedded within visual working memory rather than that of verbal working memory. This simultaneously suggests that when the demand for grammatical encoding is generated, inaccuracy is most prominent in terms of verbal working memory rather than through visual working memory.
The anticipation through research hypothesis indicated at the beginning of the experiment stated that unrelated noun prompts are likely to pose greater disruption upon visual working memory than verbal working memory. However, the results of the experiment at the final stage of interpretation and data findings depict completely contrasting results. It is the use of related nouns that induce greater difficulty for use of grammatical encoding from verbal working memory. Instead, they use of unrelated nouns as prompts to participants seemed to be complex and difficult for visual working memory demanding planning resources. In the case of related noun provision, the verbal working memory disruptions were indicated because the sentence construction requires lower demand on planning than on grammatical encoding. Moreover, it is also found that verbal working memory creates disruptive impacts both in the case of active as well as passive sentences.
Conclusion:
The present journal is a scientific experimental study upon the role of working memory towards planning and generating written sentences. Zabihi, (2018) indicates that with the help of experimentation, the students of Louis University are selected for participation towards different groups. For being subjected to active sentence formation with a verb in them, 30 students are made to participate. However, for participating in passive sentence construction without a verb in them, 44 students are selected. This online participation is categorized for specific findings and interpretations. Before forming sentences the students are provided with related nouns in certain cases and the next phase with unrelated nouns. The hypothesis stated for the present study proposed that unrelated nouns prompted to participants would result in a slower response pattern among students which would require extra time. Other than the related or unrelated noun nature, the length of the sentence is also a potential factor that interferes with the sentence formation capability. The need for planning triggers the visual working memory which is mandatory for establishing consistency between related and unrelated nouns in a sentence. The other requirement is posed in the form of grammatical encoding whereby the demand for verbal working memory is felt. This makes the consistency between related and unrelated nouns getmanifested in different equations.
It is the need for finding the temporal dynamics that production of the sentence becomes necessary. The motor response rate is indicated to slow down when difficulty levels are more and complexities are increased. This makes the integration process questioned due to the use of unrelated nouns in the sentence which lowers the accuracy. The use of correct strategies like demand from verbal working memory helps to create a strong association between unrelated nouns.
Although inconsistent with the hypothesis, the research findings depict that students take less time and show greater accuracy when unrelated nouns are prompted in case of establishing grammatical encoding capability through verbal working memory resources. Reversibly, the related nouns provided as prompts derive greater demand from visual working memory as the easy exercise of understanding and planning gets included through the process. This determines how to separate domains of working memory get activate to play a dominant role in written sentence generation. There is a direct implication made from this experimental study that the use of differentiated strategies according to situational changes helps to derive better sentence construction ability. The process of successful integration between nouns and sentence accuracy takes place only when different compartments of working memory like verbal or visual processes are used with changing phases of related and unrelated nouns.
References
Costa, L. J., Green, M., Sideris, J., & Hooper, S. R. (2018).First-grade cognitive predictors of writing disabilities in grades 2 through 4 elementary school students. Journal of learning disabilities, 51(4), 351-362. Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0022219417721182
Galbraith, D., &Baaijen, V. M. (2018). The work of writing: Raiding the inarticulate. Educational Psychologist, 53(4), 238-257. Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00461520.2018.1505515
Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Beard, K. (2019).Teaching writing to young African American male students using evidence-based practices. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 35(1), 19-29. Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10573569.2018.1535775
Hebert, M., Kearns, D. M., Hayes, J. B., Bazis, P., & Cooper, S. (2018). Why do children with dyslexia struggle with writing and how to help them Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 49(4), 843-863.
Retrieved from https://pubs.asha.org/doi/abs/10.1044/2018_LSHSS-DYSLC-18-0024 Kellogg, R. T., Turner, C. E., Whiteford, A. P., &Mertens, A. (2016).The Role of Working Memory in Planning and Generating Written Sentences. Journal of Writing Research, 7(3). Retrieved fromhttps://www.researchgate.net/profile/Casey-Turner-3/publication/293479187_The_Role_of_Working_Memory_in_Planning_and_Generating_Written_ Sentences/links/582de12008aef19cb813df26/The-Role-of-Working-Memory-in- Planning-and-Generating-Written-Sentences.pdf
Kim, Y. S. G., & Park, S. H. (2019). Unpacking pathways using the direct and indirect effects model of writing (DIEW) and the contributions of higher-order cognitive skills to writing. Reading and Writing, 32(5), 1319-1343. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11145-018-9913-y
Kintsch, W. (2018). Revisiting the Construction—Integration Model of Text Comprehension and Its Implications for Instruction. In Theoretical models and processes of literacy (pp. 178-203). Routledge. Retrieved from https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315110592-12/revisiting-construction%E2%80%94integration-model-text-comprehension-implications-instruction-walter-kintsch
Krueger, R., Huang, Y., Liu, X., Santander, T., Weimer, W., & Leach, K. (2020, October). Neurological divide: an fMRI study of prose and code writing. In 2020 IEEE/ACM 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE) (pp. 678-690).IEEE. Retrieved from https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9284060/ Li, S., &Roshan, S. (2019).The associations between working memory and the effects of four different types of written corrective feedback. Psychology assignmentJournal of Second Language Writing, 45, 1-15. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1060374318303151
Limpo, T., &Alves, R. A. (2018).Effects of planning strategies on writing dynamics and final texts. ActaPsychologica, 188, 97-109. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001691818300672
Martin, R. C. (2021). The critical role of semantic working memory in language comprehension and production. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 30(4), 283-291. Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0963721421995178
Martin, R. C. (2021). The critical role of semantic working memory in language comprehension and production. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 30(4), 283-291. Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0963721421995178
Poch, A. L., &Lembke, E. S. (2017).A not-so-simple view of adolescent writing. International Journal for Research in Learning Disabilities, 3(2), 27-44. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Michal-Al-Yagon/publication/321834241_Executive_functioning_and_psychopathology_in_psychotherapy_ for_adolescents_with_specific_learning_disorders/links/5bf274a24585150b2bc12681/ Executive-functioning-and-psychopathology-in-psychotherapy-for-adolescents-with- specific-learning-disorders.pdf#page=29
Révész, A., Michel, M., & Lee, M. (2017).Investigating IELTS Academic Writing Task 2: Relationships between cognitive writing processes, text quality, and working memory. Retrieved from https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/360000
Robison, M. K., &Unsworth, N. (2017).Working memory capacity and mind-wandering during low-demand cognitive tasks. Consciousness and Cognition, 52, 47-54. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053810016303816
Rostamian, M., Fazilatfar, A. M., &Jabbari, A. A. (2018).The effect of planning time on cognitive processes, monitoring behavior, and quality of L2 writing. Language Teaching Research, 22(4), 418-438. Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1362168817699239 Salas, N., &Silvente, S. (2020). The role of executive functions and transcription skills in writing: a cross-sectional study across 7 years of schooling. Reading and Writing, 33(4), 877-905. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11145-019-09979-y
Salas, N., &Silvente, S. (2020). The role of executive functions and transcription skills in writing: a cross-sectional study across 7 years of schooling. Reading and Writing, 33(4), 877-905. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11145-019-09979-y
Schwering, S. C., & MacDonald, M. C. (2020). Verbal working memory is emergent from language comprehension and production. Frontiers in human neuroscience, 14, 68. Retrieved from https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2020.00068/full
Sénéchal, M., Hill, S., &Malette, M. (2018). Individual differences in grade 4 children’s written compositions: The role of online planning and revising, oral storytelling, and reading for pleasure. Cognitive Development, 45, 92-104. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0885201417300552
Sung, J. E., Eom, B., & Lee, S. E. (2018).Effects of working memory demands on sentence production in aphasia. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 48, 64-75. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0911604417301124
Velichkovsky, B. B., Bondarenko, I. N., &Morosanova, V. I. (2019). The relationship between executive functions and language competencies in middle school children.Psychology in Russia: State of the art, 12(1). Retrieved from https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/18071778 Yi, X., Sun, M., Li, R., & Yang, Z. (2018).Chinese poetry generation with a working memory model. arXiv preprint arXiv:1809.04306. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1809.04306 Zabihi, R. (2018). The role of cognitive and affective factors in measures of L2 writing. Written Communication, 35(1), 32-57.
Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0741088317735836
Zalbidea, J. (2017). ‘One task fits all’ The roles of task complexity, modality, and working memory capacity in L2 performance. The Modern Language Journal, 101(2), 335-352. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/modl.12389
