![\"GeorgeWashington\"](\"http:\/\/web.colby.edu\/cogblog\/files\/2015\/11\/GeorgeWashington.png\")
\n<\/a><\/p>\n
Before delving into how working memory and lying are related, a quick review of how working memory operates might be helpful. First, working memory is a system that holds information so that it can be processed. For example, during reading, working memory processes the incoming meaning while also maintaining the information already read, adding the newly acquired information to what is already known while also inhibiting unnecessary distractions or irrelevant information. Clearly, working memory juggles several jobs at once and is clearly important in how we operate. But how exactly does working memory function?<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n So what is the real world importance of working memory capacity? Research has shown that those with higher working memories have better reading comprehension, have higher fluid intelligence, learn faster,\u00a0are better at inhibiting irrelevant information, and are better at juggling multiple ideas at once\u00a0(see here<\/a> and here<\/a> for interesting additional blog reading). But how does differing working memory capacities play out in social situations? If one is better able to coordinate the incoming stimuli, update memory stores, and recall appropriate information (i.e. have a better working memory),\u00a0then will one be better at lying? Yes!\u00a0Deception requires working memory to keep multiple pieces of information straight. But what components of working memory are the most important in lying?<\/p>\n <\/p>\n In a recent study by Alloway et al. (2015), the researchers were curious about how working memory plays a role in lying. Specifically, they wanted to investigate which working memory component, the phonological loop or visuo-spatial sketchpad, plays the largest role in the context of lying, or whether the two systems are dissociable and are controlled through the central executive so that both are linked with lie-telling.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n To explore these questions, researchers tested 137 children, ages 6 and 7, using a temptation resistance paradigm. This paradigm required children to answer three trivia questions with the answers on the backs of the cards. After asking the third question and preparing for the fourth and last question, the experimenter left the room, telling the control condition that they could look at the card and the experimental condition that they couldn\u2019t peek. After the experimenter came back, she or he asked the final question. Afterwards, the experimenter asked several entrapment questions regarding the answer to the trivia question, attempting to catch the children in a lie. This paradigm measured the children\u2019s ability to maintain consistency in their responses as they continue to tell lies (semantic leakage). The children also took both phonological loop and visuo-spatial measures of working memory.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The results showed that good liars (peekers that did not admit to peeking) had higher overall working memory scores than bad liars. Furthermore, in the condition where the experimenter told the children that they couldn’t peek, the good liars had higher verbal working memory compared with the bad liars. These findings suggest that children\u2019s semantic leakage control (i.e. being a good liar) involves verbal working memory, or the phonological loop, and not the visuo-spatial sketchpad. This makes sense because there is a lot of information juggling while one processes and manipulates information during a lie. Lying takes a lot of effort; one must be aware of several things like inhibiting the truth, activating the lie, making sure everything seems smooth and normal. To be a successful liar, one must have an active phonological loop because most often, lies are in a verbal form, and so rely on verbal working memory.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n So instead of being extremely honest, maybe George Washington had a low working memory capacity and was unable to juggle multiple items at once to successfully deceive his father. His phonological loop failed him and he was forced to admit that he could not tell a lie. Lucky for him, his father did not assume that his son may have been lacking in working memory and instead attributed his son\u2019s behavior to an honorable sense of honesty. Maybe, if George had a higher working memory, he would have lied. Maybe a lie would have changed the course of history and we might now all be British otherwise. Who knows? Memory is a powerful force.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n References<\/p>\n Alloway, T. P., McCallum, F., Alloway, R. G., & Hoicka, E. (2015). Liar, liar, working memory on fire: Investigating the role of working memory in childhood verbal deception. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 137, <\/em>30-38.<\/p>\n Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Chapter: Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In Spence, K. W., & Spence, J. T.\u00a0The psychology of learning and motivation<\/em>\u00a0(Volume 2). New York: Academic Press. pp. 89\u2013195.<\/p>\n Baddeley, A .D., & Hitch, G. (1974). Working memory. In G.H. Bower (Ed.),\u00a0The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory<\/em>\u00a0(Vol. 8, pp. 47\u201389). New York: Academic Press.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" As the legend goes, an angry father confronts his son about the damage to a cherry tree. \u201cI cannot tell a lie,\u201d young George Washington proudly asserts, \u201cI did cut it with my hatchet.\u201d Washington Senior proceeds to forgive his son, because George\u2019s honesty was more valuable than a thousand trees. This legend has been […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4718,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[80216,80215],"tags":[130423,130377],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/cogblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2274"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/cogblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/cogblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/cogblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4718"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/cogblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2274"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/cogblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2274\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2392,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/cogblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2274\/revisions\/2392"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/cogblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2274"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/cogblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2274"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/web.colby.edu\/cogblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2274"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Working memory has several components that function in concert to hold and manipulate information. Two of the components are called the \u201cslave systems\u201d, or the phonological loop and the visuo-spatial sketchpad. The visuo-spatial sketchpad<\/strong> is concerned with non\u2014verbal representations of spatial and visual information. Faces, mental rotations,\u00a0and maps all draw on the visuo-spatial sketchpad to be interpreted. The phonological loop<\/strong> processes verbal information. The central executive<\/strong> coordinates the two slave systems, and monitors the incoming information to decide what to pay attention to and what to inhibit. Finally, the episodic buffer<\/strong> integrates the working memory components and integrates these representations with long-term memory.<\/p>\n