Abstract
The data presented by Kemps, De Rammelaere, and Desmet (2000, this issue) appear to have some aspects that fit most readily into our own model (Baddeley & Hitch, 1974), while others appear to support that of Pascual-Leone (1970). We accept that our initial model said little about development and was better able to account for relatively simple memory-based tasks than more complex cognitive activities. More recent elaborations of the model are, however, able to throw new light on the processes underlying cognitive development, offering a better account than that provided by existing neo-Piagetian interpretations. Meanwhile, the addition of a fourth component to the model, namely the episodic buffer, offers a way of dealing with more complex cognitive activities. Given the major differences between our own model and that of Pascual-Leone in basic assumptions, and in theoretical style, we suggest that any attempt to combine the two would be premature.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 128-37 |
| Number of pages | 10 |
| Journal | Journal of Experimental Child Psychology |
| Volume | 77 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2000 |
Keywords
- Adult
- Child
- Child Development
- Child, Preschool
- Female
- Humans
- Male
- Mental Recall
- Models, Psychological
- Orientation
- Pattern Recognition, Visual
- Psychomotor Performance