Example Of Working Memory Training Research Paper

In the article titled, Dahlin (2013) highlighted the central role of working memory in thinking and learning. Working memory is considered as the cognitive system that retains and processes data. Using the concept of Cowan (2005), it was suggested that for people to remember certain information, it has to be dealt with in the working memory. Working memory facilitates learning through the skills to attend to the responsibility in hand, constrain irrelevant data and incorporate data from various sources, encompassing long-term memory. Work memory is the capacity to govern how successful learning is as it includes procedures needed for accomplishing automatized knowledge (Cowan, 2005).
Dahlin (2013) described the different theories that elucidated the processing functions of working memory. Ericsson & Kintsch (1995) also suggested a system that encompasses processing in long term memory and working memory. In this paper, Dahlin mentioned Barkley’s (1997) model of executive functions from various theories. Barkley (1997) suggested four executive functions needed for behavioral inhibition and that which impact the motor control skill. The four executive functions include work memory, self-regulation, reconstitution, and internationalization of speech (Dahlin, 2013).
Dahlin (2013) aimed to answer the following questions: (1) How children who have attention deficits do in Mathematics following the five week training in working memory at post-tests; (2) How children belonging to the treatment group do in working memory measures at post-tests than pre-tests; (3) How are the results of the scores measure in working memory, training, and mathematics; (4) Do girls and boys perform distinctly in mathematics and working memory measure.
In this paper, Dahlin (2013) investigated the work using an interactive program for computerized working memory at school. The purpose of the study is to determine the impact of mathematical performance of the learners. The independent variable in the study is the mathematical performance of the learners while the dependent variables are the learners themselves. The study involved 57 children. These children have attention deficits and all of them took involvement in the intervention program. In this study, the treatment group participated in the daily training for about 30 to 40 minutes at school. The training lasted for five weeks. On the other hand, the control group did not have any extra training. Comparing the two groups, the children’s mathematical performance in the treatment group showed progress compared with that of the control group after the training which lasted for 5 weeks. However, the outcome of the second post-test which transpired 7 months later was already insignificant. Because there were merely few girls, the outcomes of the study were only examined for boys. The results showed that the boys had greatly enhanced the results of the post-tests in Mathematics. Measures of work memory developed during the second and third time in relation to the pre-test for the whole group, especially for the boys.
Variations in preparing scores were identified with variations in the non-verbal WM-measure Span board back. The outcomes demonstrate that children, particularly the boys aged 9 to 12 with exceptional needs may gain advantage, over the long run, from work memory training, as demonstrated in the upgraded results in Mathematics after the training for work memory. However, as the control and intervention groups were not randomized, the outcomes cannot be summed up; the outcomes must be considered with careful attention.
The practical implications of this study state that the measure capacity of working memory could beneficial for the early recognition of boys and girls at risk of failures in school. Children with special needs and attention deficits also scored low in mathematics compared to children who attended regular classes.

References

Dahlin, K. (2013). Working Memory Training and the Effect on Mathematical Achievement in Children with Attention Deficits and Special Needs. JEL, 2(1). doi:10.5539/jel.v2n1p118
Barkley, R. A. (1997). Behavioral inhibition, sustained attention, and executive functions: Constructing a unifying theory of ADHD. Psychological Bulletin, 121(1), 65-94.
Cowan, N. (2005). The working memory capacity. Sussex: Psychology Press.
Ericsson, A. K., & Kintsch, W. (1995). Long-term working memory. Psychological Review, 102(2), 211-245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0033-295X.102.211