Stocks and losses, items and interference: A reply to Oberauer and Süß (2000)

Abstract

Results ofa recent study ofspatial working memory are presented in support ofthe claim by Jenkins and her col- leagues (Jenkins, Myerson, Hale, & Fry, 1999) that sec- ondary tasks produce larger interference effects in indi- viduals with higher simple spans than in individuals with lower simple spans. Because spans and interference effects were assessed independently, this study refutes the claim by Oberauer and Siij3 (2000) that the relation be- tween span and interference effect size is merely an arti- fact ofregression to the mean, In contrast with the present findings, Oberauer and Siij3 did not find evidence of larger interference effects in higherspan individuals, but the reasonfor this may bestraightforward: The secondary tasks that they used did not produce significant interfer- ence.Recentfindings by Logie and his coUeagues indicate that phonological similarity and word length effects are larger in individuals with higher word spans (Logie, DeUaSala,Laiacona, Chalmers, & Wynn, 1996). Thesere- sults, those ofJenkins, Myerson, et al: (1999), and the re- sults reported here suggest that, across individuals, the absolute effect sizeformany manipulations that decrease memory span is an increasing function ofsimple span.