更改

None of these hypotheses can explain the experimental data entirely. The resource hypothesis, for example, was meant to explain the trade-off between maintenance and processing: The more information must be maintained in working memory, the slower and more error prone concurrent processes become, and with a higher demand on concurrent processing memory suffers. This trade-off has been investigated by tasks like the reading-span task described above. It has been found that the amount of trade-off depends on the similarity of the information to be remembered and the information to be processed. For example, remembering numbers while processing spatial information, or remembering spatial information while processing numbers, impair each other much less than when material of the same kind must be remembered and processed. Also, remembering words and processing digits, or remembering digits and processing words, is easier than remembering and processing materials of the same category. These findings are also difficult to explain for the decay hypothesis, because decay of memory representations should depend only on how long the processing task delays rehearsal or recall, not on the content of the processing task. A further problem for the decay hypothesis comes from experiments in which the recall of a list of letters was delayed, either by instructing participants to recall at a slower pace, or by instructing them to say an irrelevant word once or three times in between recall of each letter. Delaying recall had virtually no effect on recall accuracy. The interference theory seems to fare best with explaining why the similarity between memory contents and the contents of concurrent processing tasks affects how much they impair each other. More similar materials are more likely to be confused, leading to retrieval competition.

None of these hypotheses can explain the experimental data entirely. The resource hypothesis, for example, was meant to explain the trade-off between maintenance and processing: The more information must be maintained in working memory, the slower and more error prone concurrent processes become, and with a higher demand on concurrent processing memory suffers. This trade-off has been investigated by tasks like the reading-span task described above. It has been found that the amount of trade-off depends on the similarity of the information to be remembered and the information to be processed. For example, remembering numbers while processing spatial information, or remembering spatial information while processing numbers, impair each other much less than when material of the same kind must be remembered and processed. Also, remembering words and processing digits, or remembering digits and processing words, is easier than remembering and processing materials of the same category. These findings are also difficult to explain for the decay hypothesis, because decay of memory representations should depend only on how long the processing task delays rehearsal or recall, not on the content of the processing task. A further problem for the decay hypothesis comes from experiments in which the recall of a list of letters was delayed, either by instructing participants to recall at a slower pace, or by instructing them to say an irrelevant word once or three times in between recall of each letter. Delaying recall had virtually no effect on recall accuracy. The interference theory seems to fare best with explaining why the similarity between memory contents and the contents of concurrent processing tasks affects how much they impair each other. More similar materials are more likely to be confused, leading to retrieval competition.

这些假说都不能完全解释实验数据。例如，资源假说旨在解释维护和加工之间的平衡: 工作记忆中所必须保存的信息越多，则并发过程就变得越慢、越容易出错，且对并发加工记忆的要求也越高。这种平衡已通过前述的阅读广度任务等进行了研究。研究发现，平衡量取决于所要记忆或处理的信息的相似性。例如，在处理空间信息时记忆数字，或者在处理数字时记忆空间信息的相互干渉都比在记忆或处理同类材料时要小得多。此外，记忆单词时处理数字，或记忆数字时处理单词，也比记忆和处理同一类别材料时更容易。对于衰退假来说这些发现也很难解释，因为记忆表征的衰退应该只取决于处理任务延迟刷新的时间，而不取决于处理任务的内容。衰退假说的另一个问题来自于延迟回忆字母列表的实验，要么要求参与者以较慢的速度回忆，要么要求他们在回忆每个字母的间隔说一个不相关单词一至三次。但延迟回忆对回忆准确率几乎没有影响。干扰理论似乎最好地解释了记忆内容和同时处理任务内容之间的相似性影响它们彼此之间减损程度的原因在于：材料越相似就越容易混淆，导致检索竞争。

这些假说都不能完全解释实验数据。例如，'''<font color="#ff8000">资源理论 Resource Theories</font>'''旨在解释维护和加工之间的平衡: 工作记忆中所必须保存的信息越多，则并发过程就变得越慢、越容易出错，且对并发加工记忆的要求也越高。这种平衡已通过前述的阅读广度任务等进行了研究。研究发现，平衡量取决于所要记忆或处理的信息的相似性。例如，在处理空间信息时记忆数字，或者在处理数字时记忆空间信息的相互干渉都比在记忆或处理同类材料时要小得多。此外，记忆单词时处理数字，或记忆数字时处理单词，也比记忆和处理同一类别材料时更容易。对于衰退假来说这些发现也很难解释，因为记忆表征的衰退应该只取决于处理任务延迟刷新的时间，而不取决于处理任务的内容。'''<font color="#ff8000">衰退假说 Decay Theories</font>'''的另一个问题来自于延迟回忆字母列表的实验，要么要求参与者以较慢的速度回忆，要么要求他们在回忆每个字母的间隔说一个不相关单词一至三次。但延迟回忆对回忆准确率几乎没有影响。'''<font color="#ff8000">干扰理论 Interference Theories</font>'''似乎最好地解释了记忆内容和同时处理任务内容之间的相似性影响它们彼此之间减损程度的原因在于：材料越相似就越容易混淆，导致检索竞争。

== 发展 Development ==

== 发展 Development ==