Back to overview

On the proper reading of the TBRS model: A reply to Oberauer and Lewandowsky (2014).

Type of publication Peer-reviewed
Publikationsform Review article (peer-reviewed)
Publication date 2014
Author Barrouillet Pierre, Camos Valerie,
Project What is attentional refreshing?
Show all

Review article (peer-reviewed)

Journal Frontiers
Volume (Issue) 5
Page(s) 1331
Title of proceedings Frontiers
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01331

Open Access


The limitations of working memory (WM) and their determinants have been a matter of intense debate in the last years (e.g., Barrouillet and Camos, 2012; Oberauer and Lewandowsky, 2013; Ricker et al., 2014; see Barrouillet and Camos, 2015, for a review). Is forgetting from WM only due to interference, or do WM traces also suffer from temporal decay? This latter hypothesis has recently gained some credence from the verification of the main predictions of the time-based resource-sharing model (TBRS, Barrouillet et al., 2004), a theory that describes WM functioning as the interplay between the antagonistic processes of temporal decay and restoration of memory traces. However, Oberauer and Lewandowsky (2014) have lately claimed that the predictions that the authors of the TBRS model drew from their theory do not follow from its main tenets. In this rejoinder, we show that Oberauer and Lewandowsky's analysis is wrong, revealing a misunderstanding of the TBRS model.