El rol de la memoria de trabajo y la atención sostenida en la generación de inferencias explicativas
Palabras clave:
textos expositivos, inferencias, memoria de trabajo, comprensión, atención sostenida
Resumen
El propósito de este trabajo consistió en estudiar la relación entre la memoria de trabajo, la capacidad de sostener la atención y la generación de inferencias explicativas-repositivas en la comprensión de textos expositivos. Para ello, 120 alumnos universitarios leyeron dos textos expositivos del área de las ciencias naturales y completaron un cuestionario de generación de inferencia, junto con cuatro pruebas de memoria de trabajo verbal y dos pruebas que miden la capacidad de sostener la atención sobre una tarea. Los resultados indicaron que el componenente ejecutivo de la memoria de trabajo verbal tienen un efecto directo sobre la generación de inferencias, mientras la capacidad de sostener la atención y el almacenamiento de información en la memoria de trabajo verbal tienen un efecto indirecto mediado por el componente ejecutivo. Esto sugiere que las diferencias individuales en la generación de inferencias están vinculadas a las diferencias inviduales en la memoria de trabajo, y también a las diferencias individuales en la capacidad de sostener la atención.
Descargas
La descarga de datos todavía no está disponible.
Citas
Abusamra, V., & Joanette, Y. (2012). Lectura, escritura y comprensión de textos: Aspectos cognitivos de una habilidad cultural. Neuropsicologia Latinoamericana, 4(1), 1-4.
Arbuckle, J. L. (2014). IBM SPSS AMOS 22 User’s Guide. Mount Pleasant, SC: Amos Development Corporation.
Awh, E., & Jonides, J. (2001). Overlapping mechanisms of attention and spatial working memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(3), 119-126.
Baddeley, A. D. (2010). Working memory. Current Biology, 20(4), 136-140. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2009.12.014
Baddeley, A. D. (2012). Working Memory: Theories, Models, and Controversies. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 1-29. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych- 120710-100422
Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. J. (1974). Working memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Advances in Research and Theory (Vol. 8, pp. 47-90). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Barreyro, J. P., Cevasco, J., Burin, D. I., & Molinari, C. (2012). Working memory capacity and individual differences in the making of reinstatement and elaborative inferences. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 15(2), 471-479. doi: 10.5209/rev_SJOP.2012.v15.n2.38857
Barreyro, J. P., Injoque Ricle, I., Formoso, J., & Burin, D. (en evaluación). Computerized Working Memory Battery (BIMeT-V): Studying the Relation between Working Memory, Verbal Reasoning and Reading Comprehension.
Barth, A., Barnes, M. A., Francis, D., York, M., & Vaughn, S. (2015). Bridging inferences among adequate and struggling adolescent comprehenders and relations to reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 28(5), 587-609. doi: 10.1007/s11145-014-9540-1
Bohn-Gettler, C. M., & Kendeou, P. (2014). The interplay of reader goals, working memory, and text structure during reading. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39(3), 206–219. doi: 10.1016/ j.cedpsych.2014.05.003
Brock, S. E., & Knapp, P. K. (1996). Reading comprehension abilities of children with attention- deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Attention Disorders, 1(13), 173-185.
Budd, D., Whitney, P., & Turley, K. (1995). Individual differences in working memory strategies for reading expository text. Memory & Cognition, 23, 735-748. doi: 10.3758/BF03200926
Calvo, M. G. (2004). Relative contribution of vocabulary knowledge and working memory span to elaborative inferences in reading. Learning and Individual Differences, 15, 53-65. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2004.07.002
Carlson, S. E., van den Broek, P., McMaster, K., Rapp, D. N., Bohn-Gettler, C. M., Kendeou, P., & White, M. J. (2014). Effects of comprehension skill on inference generation during reading. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 61(3), 258- 274. doi: 10.1080/1034912X.2014.934004
Carretti, B., Borella, E., Cornoldi, C., & De Beni, R. (2009). Role of working memory in explaining the performance of individuals with specific reading comprehension difficulties: A meta-analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 246 –251. doi: 10.1016/ j.lindif.200810.002
Cornoldi, C., & Oakhill, J. V. (2013). Reading comprehension difficulties: Processes and intervention. Oxford, UK: Routledge.
Cowan, N. (2012). Working memory capacity. New York, NY: Psychology press.
Currie, N. K., & Cain, K. (2015). Children’s inference generation: The role of vocabulary and working memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 137, 57–75. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2015.03.005
Diamond, A., & Goldman-Rakic, P. S. (1989). Comparison of human infants and rhesus monkeys on Piaget ́s tasks: Evidence of dependence on dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Experimental Brain Research, 74(9), 24-40.
Elbro, C., & Buch-Iversen, I. (2013). Activation of background knowledge for inference making: effects on reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 17(6), 435-452. doi: 10.1080/ 10888438.2013.774005
Freed, J., & Cain, K. (2016). Assessing school-aged children’s inference-making: the effect of story test format in listening comprehension. International Journal of Language & Comunication Disorders, 52, 95–105. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.12260
Graesser, A. C., & Bertus, E. L. (1998). The construction of causal inferences while reading expository texts on science and technology. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2(3), 247-269. doi: 10.1207/s1532799xssr0203_4
Graesser, A. C., Leon, J. A., & Otero, J. C. (2002). Introduction to the psychology of science text comprehension. In J. Otero, J. A. Leon & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 1-15). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, 371-395.
Hair, F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis with readings. New Jersey, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hannon, B. (2012). Understanding the Relative Contributions of Lower Level Word Processes, Higher Level Processes, and Working Memory to Reading Comprehension Performance in Proficient Adult Readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(2), 125-152. doi: 10.1598/0710.33
Harrington, D. (2008). Confirmatory factor analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hecker, L., Burns, L., Katz, L., Elkind, J., & Elkind, K. (2002). Benefits of assistive reading software for students with attention disorders. Annals of Dyslexia, 52(1), 243-272.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424–453. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
Jaccard, J., & Wan, C. K. (1996). LISREL approaches to interaction effects in multiple regression. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Kane, M. J., & Engle, R. W. (2000). Working-memory capacity, proactive interference, and divided attention: limits on long-term memory retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(2), 336-358. doi: 10.1037/0278- 7393.26.2.336
Kendeou, P., Smith, E. R., & O’Brien, E. J. (2013). Updating during reading comprehension: Why causality matters. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 854–865. doi: 10.1037/ a0029468
Kintsch, W., Patel, V. L., & Ericsson, K. A. (1999). The role of long-term working memory in text comprehension. Psychologia, 42(4), 186-198.
Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Towards a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363-394. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.363
Leon, J. A., & Peñalba, G. E. (2002). Understanding Causality and Temporal Sequence in Scientific Discourse. In J. Otero, J. A. Leon & A. Graesser (Eds.), The Psychology of Science Text Comprehension (pp. 155-178). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlabaum.
Loosli, S. V., Buschkuehl, M., Perrig, W. J., & Jaeggi, S. M. (2012). Working memory training improves reading processes in typically developing children. Child Neuropsychology, 18(1), 62-78. doi: 10.1080/ 09297049.2011.575772
McVay, J. C., & Kane, M. J. (2012). Why does working memory capacity predict variation in reading comprehension? On the influence of mind wandering and executive attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(2), 302-320. doi: 10.1037/ a0025250
Pérez, A. I., Paolieri, D., Macizo, P., & Bajo, T. (2014). The role of working memory in inferential sentence comprehension. Cognitive processing, 15(3), 405-413. doi: 10.1007/s10339-014-0611-7
Prat, C. S., Seo, R., & , & Yamasaki, B. L. (2016). The Role of Individual Differences in Working Memory Capacity on Reading Comprehension Ability. In P. Afflerbach (Ed.), Handbook of Individual Differences in Reading: Reader, Text, and Context (pp. 331-347). New York, NY: Routledge.
Rebollo, M. A., & Montiel, S. (2006). Atención y Funciones Ejecutivas. Revista de Neuropsicología, 42(3), 3-7.
Saux, G., Irrazabal, N. & Burin, D.I. (2014). Comprensión de textos de ciencias en estudiantes universitarios: generación de inferencias causales durante la lectura. Liberabit, 20(2), 305-313.
Shumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (1996). A beginner guide to structural equation modeling: Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Singer, M., Harkness, D., & Stewart, T. (1997). Constructing inferences in expository text comprehension. Discourse Processes, 24, 199-228.
Singer, M., & O’Connell, G. (2003). Robust inference processes in expository text comprehension. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 15(4), 607-631. doi: 10.1080/095414400340000079
Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Arlington, VA.
Unsworth, N., & McMillan, B. D. (2013). Mind wandering and reading comprehension: Examining the roles of working memory capacity, interest, motivation, and topic experience. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(3), 832-842. doi: 10.1037/a0029669
Updlike, J. (2009). Marte, regreso al planeta rojo. National Geographic España, 24(1), 2-19.
van den Broek, P., & Kendeou, P. (2008). Cognitive processes in comprehension of science texts: The role of co-activation in confronting misconceptions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 335-351. doi: 10.1002/acp.1418
van den Broek, P., Mouw, J. M., & Kraal, A. (2016). Individual Differences in Reading Comprehension. In P. Afflerbach (Ed.), Handbook of Individual Differences in Reading: Reader, Text, and Context (pp. 138-150). New York, NY: Routledge.
van den Broek, P., Risden, K. C., Fletcher, C. R., & Thurlow, R. (1996). A «landscape» view of reading: Fluctuating patterns of activation and the construction of a stable memory representation. . In B. K. Britton & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Models of understanding text (pp. 165-187). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
van den Broek, P., Rohleder, L., & Narváez, D. (1996). Causal inferences in the comprehension of literary text. In R. J. Kreuz & M. S. MacNealy (Eds.), Empirical approaches to literature and aesthetics. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
van den Broek, P., Virtue, S., Everson, M., Tzeng, Y., & Sung, Y. C. (2002). Comprehension and memory of science texts: Inferential processes and the construction of a mental representation. In J. Otero, J. A. Leon & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The Psychology of Science Text Comprehension (pp. 131–154). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Van Dijk, T., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Van Dyke, J. A., Johns, C. L., & Kukona, A. (2014). Low working memory capacity is only spuriously related to poor reading comprehension. Cognition, 131(3), 373- 403. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.01.007
Vidal-Abarca, E., Martínez, E., & Gilabert, R. (2000). Two procedures to improve instructional text: Effects on memory and learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 107-116. doi: 10.1037/0022- 0663.92.1.107
Vidal-Abarca, E., Reyes, H., Gilabert, R., Calpe, J., Soria, E., & Graesser, A. C. (2002). ETAT: Expository Text Analysis Tool. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 34, 93-107. doi: 10.3758/ BF03195428
Wang, S., & Gathercole, S. E. (2013). Working memory deficits in children with reading difficulties: memory span and dual task coordination. Journal of Experimental Child Csychology, 115(1), 188-197. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2012.11.015
Wechsler, D. (2003). WAIS III: Test de Inteligencia para Adultos. Buenos Aires, AR: Paidós.
Arbuckle, J. L. (2014). IBM SPSS AMOS 22 User’s Guide. Mount Pleasant, SC: Amos Development Corporation.
Awh, E., & Jonides, J. (2001). Overlapping mechanisms of attention and spatial working memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(3), 119-126.
Baddeley, A. D. (2010). Working memory. Current Biology, 20(4), 136-140. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2009.12.014
Baddeley, A. D. (2012). Working Memory: Theories, Models, and Controversies. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 1-29. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych- 120710-100422
Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. J. (1974). Working memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Advances in Research and Theory (Vol. 8, pp. 47-90). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Barreyro, J. P., Cevasco, J., Burin, D. I., & Molinari, C. (2012). Working memory capacity and individual differences in the making of reinstatement and elaborative inferences. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 15(2), 471-479. doi: 10.5209/rev_SJOP.2012.v15.n2.38857
Barreyro, J. P., Injoque Ricle, I., Formoso, J., & Burin, D. (en evaluación). Computerized Working Memory Battery (BIMeT-V): Studying the Relation between Working Memory, Verbal Reasoning and Reading Comprehension.
Barth, A., Barnes, M. A., Francis, D., York, M., & Vaughn, S. (2015). Bridging inferences among adequate and struggling adolescent comprehenders and relations to reading comprehension. Reading and Writing, 28(5), 587-609. doi: 10.1007/s11145-014-9540-1
Bohn-Gettler, C. M., & Kendeou, P. (2014). The interplay of reader goals, working memory, and text structure during reading. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39(3), 206–219. doi: 10.1016/ j.cedpsych.2014.05.003
Brock, S. E., & Knapp, P. K. (1996). Reading comprehension abilities of children with attention- deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Attention Disorders, 1(13), 173-185.
Budd, D., Whitney, P., & Turley, K. (1995). Individual differences in working memory strategies for reading expository text. Memory & Cognition, 23, 735-748. doi: 10.3758/BF03200926
Calvo, M. G. (2004). Relative contribution of vocabulary knowledge and working memory span to elaborative inferences in reading. Learning and Individual Differences, 15, 53-65. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2004.07.002
Carlson, S. E., van den Broek, P., McMaster, K., Rapp, D. N., Bohn-Gettler, C. M., Kendeou, P., & White, M. J. (2014). Effects of comprehension skill on inference generation during reading. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 61(3), 258- 274. doi: 10.1080/1034912X.2014.934004
Carretti, B., Borella, E., Cornoldi, C., & De Beni, R. (2009). Role of working memory in explaining the performance of individuals with specific reading comprehension difficulties: A meta-analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 246 –251. doi: 10.1016/ j.lindif.200810.002
Cornoldi, C., & Oakhill, J. V. (2013). Reading comprehension difficulties: Processes and intervention. Oxford, UK: Routledge.
Cowan, N. (2012). Working memory capacity. New York, NY: Psychology press.
Currie, N. K., & Cain, K. (2015). Children’s inference generation: The role of vocabulary and working memory. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 137, 57–75. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2015.03.005
Diamond, A., & Goldman-Rakic, P. S. (1989). Comparison of human infants and rhesus monkeys on Piaget ́s tasks: Evidence of dependence on dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Experimental Brain Research, 74(9), 24-40.
Elbro, C., & Buch-Iversen, I. (2013). Activation of background knowledge for inference making: effects on reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 17(6), 435-452. doi: 10.1080/ 10888438.2013.774005
Freed, J., & Cain, K. (2016). Assessing school-aged children’s inference-making: the effect of story test format in listening comprehension. International Journal of Language & Comunication Disorders, 52, 95–105. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.12260
Graesser, A. C., & Bertus, E. L. (1998). The construction of causal inferences while reading expository texts on science and technology. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2(3), 247-269. doi: 10.1207/s1532799xssr0203_4
Graesser, A. C., Leon, J. A., & Otero, J. C. (2002). Introduction to the psychology of science text comprehension. In J. Otero, J. A. Leon & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 1-15). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during narrative text comprehension. Psychological Review, 101, 371-395.
Hair, F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis with readings. New Jersey, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hannon, B. (2012). Understanding the Relative Contributions of Lower Level Word Processes, Higher Level Processes, and Working Memory to Reading Comprehension Performance in Proficient Adult Readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(2), 125-152. doi: 10.1598/0710.33
Harrington, D. (2008). Confirmatory factor analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hecker, L., Burns, L., Katz, L., Elkind, J., & Elkind, K. (2002). Benefits of assistive reading software for students with attention disorders. Annals of Dyslexia, 52(1), 243-272.
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424–453. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1-55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
Jaccard, J., & Wan, C. K. (1996). LISREL approaches to interaction effects in multiple regression. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Kane, M. J., & Engle, R. W. (2000). Working-memory capacity, proactive interference, and divided attention: limits on long-term memory retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(2), 336-358. doi: 10.1037/0278- 7393.26.2.336
Kendeou, P., Smith, E. R., & O’Brien, E. J. (2013). Updating during reading comprehension: Why causality matters. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 854–865. doi: 10.1037/ a0029468
Kintsch, W., Patel, V. L., & Ericsson, K. A. (1999). The role of long-term working memory in text comprehension. Psychologia, 42(4), 186-198.
Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Towards a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363-394. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.363
Leon, J. A., & Peñalba, G. E. (2002). Understanding Causality and Temporal Sequence in Scientific Discourse. In J. Otero, J. A. Leon & A. Graesser (Eds.), The Psychology of Science Text Comprehension (pp. 155-178). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlabaum.
Loosli, S. V., Buschkuehl, M., Perrig, W. J., & Jaeggi, S. M. (2012). Working memory training improves reading processes in typically developing children. Child Neuropsychology, 18(1), 62-78. doi: 10.1080/ 09297049.2011.575772
McVay, J. C., & Kane, M. J. (2012). Why does working memory capacity predict variation in reading comprehension? On the influence of mind wandering and executive attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(2), 302-320. doi: 10.1037/ a0025250
Pérez, A. I., Paolieri, D., Macizo, P., & Bajo, T. (2014). The role of working memory in inferential sentence comprehension. Cognitive processing, 15(3), 405-413. doi: 10.1007/s10339-014-0611-7
Prat, C. S., Seo, R., & , & Yamasaki, B. L. (2016). The Role of Individual Differences in Working Memory Capacity on Reading Comprehension Ability. In P. Afflerbach (Ed.), Handbook of Individual Differences in Reading: Reader, Text, and Context (pp. 331-347). New York, NY: Routledge.
Rebollo, M. A., & Montiel, S. (2006). Atención y Funciones Ejecutivas. Revista de Neuropsicología, 42(3), 3-7.
Saux, G., Irrazabal, N. & Burin, D.I. (2014). Comprensión de textos de ciencias en estudiantes universitarios: generación de inferencias causales durante la lectura. Liberabit, 20(2), 305-313.
Shumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (1996). A beginner guide to structural equation modeling: Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Singer, M., Harkness, D., & Stewart, T. (1997). Constructing inferences in expository text comprehension. Discourse Processes, 24, 199-228.
Singer, M., & O’Connell, G. (2003). Robust inference processes in expository text comprehension. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 15(4), 607-631. doi: 10.1080/095414400340000079
Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Arlington, VA.
Unsworth, N., & McMillan, B. D. (2013). Mind wandering and reading comprehension: Examining the roles of working memory capacity, interest, motivation, and topic experience. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(3), 832-842. doi: 10.1037/a0029669
Updlike, J. (2009). Marte, regreso al planeta rojo. National Geographic España, 24(1), 2-19.
van den Broek, P., & Kendeou, P. (2008). Cognitive processes in comprehension of science texts: The role of co-activation in confronting misconceptions. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 335-351. doi: 10.1002/acp.1418
van den Broek, P., Mouw, J. M., & Kraal, A. (2016). Individual Differences in Reading Comprehension. In P. Afflerbach (Ed.), Handbook of Individual Differences in Reading: Reader, Text, and Context (pp. 138-150). New York, NY: Routledge.
van den Broek, P., Risden, K. C., Fletcher, C. R., & Thurlow, R. (1996). A «landscape» view of reading: Fluctuating patterns of activation and the construction of a stable memory representation. . In B. K. Britton & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Models of understanding text (pp. 165-187). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
van den Broek, P., Rohleder, L., & Narváez, D. (1996). Causal inferences in the comprehension of literary text. In R. J. Kreuz & M. S. MacNealy (Eds.), Empirical approaches to literature and aesthetics. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
van den Broek, P., Virtue, S., Everson, M., Tzeng, Y., & Sung, Y. C. (2002). Comprehension and memory of science texts: Inferential processes and the construction of a mental representation. In J. Otero, J. A. Leon & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The Psychology of Science Text Comprehension (pp. 131–154). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Van Dijk, T., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Van Dyke, J. A., Johns, C. L., & Kukona, A. (2014). Low working memory capacity is only spuriously related to poor reading comprehension. Cognition, 131(3), 373- 403. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.01.007
Vidal-Abarca, E., Martínez, E., & Gilabert, R. (2000). Two procedures to improve instructional text: Effects on memory and learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 107-116. doi: 10.1037/0022- 0663.92.1.107
Vidal-Abarca, E., Reyes, H., Gilabert, R., Calpe, J., Soria, E., & Graesser, A. C. (2002). ETAT: Expository Text Analysis Tool. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 34, 93-107. doi: 10.3758/ BF03195428
Wang, S., & Gathercole, S. E. (2013). Working memory deficits in children with reading difficulties: memory span and dual task coordination. Journal of Experimental Child Csychology, 115(1), 188-197. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2012.11.015
Wechsler, D. (2003). WAIS III: Test de Inteligencia para Adultos. Buenos Aires, AR: Paidós.
Publicado
2017-11-30
Cómo citar
Barreyro, J., Injoque-Ricle, I., Formoso, J., & Burin, D. (2017, noviembre 30). El rol de la memoria de trabajo y la atención sostenida en la generación de inferencias explicativas. LIBERABIT. Revista Peruana De Psicología, 23(2), 233 - 245. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24265/liberabit.2017.v23n2.05
Sección
Artículos Originales Breves.
Esta obra está bajo licencia internacional Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.
Derechos de autor: En caso de que el manuscrito sea aprobado para su publicación, los autores conservarán los derechos de autoría y cederán a la revista los derechos de publicación, edición, reproducción, distribución, exhibición y comunicación a nivel nacional e internacional en las diferentes bases de datos, repositorios y portales.
Política de autoarchivo: El autor puede compartir, difundir y divulgar sus investigaciones publicadas por los medios de comunicación (e.g., redes sociales académicas, repositorios y portales) disponibles en la web. Durante el proceso de revisión editorial, la revista entregará al autor las versiones previas (post-print), las cuales NO deben ser divulgadas por ningún medio de difusión y son solo de uso personal con fines de aprobación final. Liberabit enviará al autor la versión final del artículo (published version) en formato PDF y HTML para ser compartida, difundida y divulgada por los medios de comunicación disponibles en la web. Después de la publicación de los artículos, los autores pueden realizar acuerdos independientes o adicionales para la difusión no exclusiva de la versión del artículo publicado en la revista (por ejemplo, publicación en libros o repositorios institucionales), siempre que se indique con la referencia respectiva que el trabajo ha sido publicado por primera vez en esta revista.
