Open access peer-reviewed chapter
Abstract
Accumulating evidence contributed to establishing an association between working memory capacity and the ability to remember, maintain attention, and inhibit irrelevant data while switching between tasks. It is a critical cognitive skill that is mainly associated with adaptive strategies, task-switching, decision-making, reasoning, and language learning. Additionally, cognitive emotion regulation strategies and cognitive flexibility have similar critical roles for completing a task, handling a problem, and regulating the emotions arising from mostly simply negative events or, conversely, from the ones stemming from traumatic events. The basis of cognitive emotion regulation is to regulate emotions as a way to handle problems, while cognitive flexibility refers to the ability to handle more than one task at the same time. Cognitive emotion regulation can sometimes be maladaptive, and the effort of individuals might be unavailing. However, once cognitive flexibility is adopted and developed, it is expected to be adaptive in solving problems at the cognitive level. This chapter explores reciprocal associations among executive functions by mainly focusing on working memory, cognitive emotion regulation and cognitive flexibility. Further studies are advised to be conducted between cognitive emotion regulation strategies and working memory capacity, as these findings may have significant implications for understanding the correlation between memory and emotion. Cognitive flexibility is also advised to be researched more in order to understand its role in cognitive processes.
Keywords
- working memory capacity
- cognitive emotion regulation
- cognitive flexibility
- memory
- acceptance
1. Introduction
The tendency to develop strategies for managing less familiar situations is a human-specific feature that can be capsuled within executive function set in the prefrontal cortex. The learning environment of individuals is one of those places in which unfamiliar or less familiar information is most likely to be encountered, and both executive functions and strategies are necessitated. Strategies for managing cognitive tasks can be needed in memory for recalling the necessary information and using it even when it is manipulated and also in cognitive emotion regulation for regulating negative emotions, as in reappraisal. The necessity for using strategies is also of great importance during the encoding of information, internalization and acquisition it. The common grounds of all these different components necessary for managing cognitive tasks are that they are related to executive functions such as attention, inhibition, working memory capacity, decision making, cognitive emotion regulation, cognitive flexibility, planning, language activities, reasoning, problem-solving and doing multiple cognitive functions simultaneously. These cognitive processes might allow one to address some claims that those higher-order executive functions might be possibly related to each other as well as being triggered reciprocally. Researchers focus on establishing an association among those cognitive processes with the aim of understanding how one handles these processes in mind naturally by using various techniques, research modes and approaches. As numerous studies have primarily focused on the possible associations of those cognitive processes, hereby this review aims to illustrate the association among some of them, which are working memory, cognitive emotion regulation and cognitive flexibility. In doing so, it was expected to discuss the importance of those executive functions’ nature by designing such research.
Working Memory (WM) capacity is one of those higher-order executive function-related capacities that is defined as the capacity for handling the manipulation of information during cognitive activity, and it, as intellectual functioning, refers to a limited capacity in which necessary information is temporarily stored and manipulated simultaneously. A large body of research has focused on the WM capacity of individuals, and recent research in this vein suggests that individuals with high WM capacity are more accurate in cognitive tasks, and it is related to fluid intelligence, information compression, attention, cognitive flexibility all of which are executive functions of human cognition. Numerous studies have been conducted in the field of memory with the aim of understanding how inputs are processed in mind while encoding and recalling them and if their features are visuospatial, verbal or phonological matter. Some studies point to the fact that different components of working memory are most probably processed both in domain-general and domain-specific networks and put the domain-general network into a place that activates itself during working memory retention and visual and verbal working memory activation [1]. Neuropsychological evidences with regard to domain-related concerns supports that being specific to the domain might be related to the maintenance of the input rather than storing it. Working Memory (WM) is a nonunitary system and surely has subsystems that have its own storage capacity in which the input is retained before being recorded to the long-term memory (LTM) [2]. Recent neuropsychological evidences adopting the nonunitary system and the domain-general view supports the approach of Baddeley, the creator of Baddeley’s Working Memory Model and contrasts with the domain-specific and unitary system approach by Cowan [3, 4].
In our recent research article, we brought forward the same question in a different design in which participants attended three complex span tasks measuring their working memory capacity from visual, verbal and spatial perspectives. The results of the present study indicated that scores obtained from the Symmetry Span Task, which is a spatial WM task, are correlated with the scores of the Rotation Span Task, which is a verbal and nonspatial task. The correlation between a spatial and verbal task indicates that individuals with a high WM score in Symmetry Span Task also score high in the Rotation Span Task. Studies conducted with individuals with psychological or neurological disorders mostly highlight the difference between spatial and verbal WM capacity. Taking an earlier study conducted with patients with Parkinson’s disease having mild clinical symptoms as an example, it indicated that their spatial WM capacity was weaker when compared to verbal and visual WM capacity [5]. Also, a very recent study investigated the difference between verbal and visual WM capacity in depressive individuals and found that only the spatial WM capacity of individuals with unipolar depression and bipolar II depression was impaired [6]. There are some other researches indicating the difference between verbal and spatial WM capacity in healthy children. A study conducted with children indicated that verbal and spatial WM capacity have different neural bases in children [7]. Additionally, verbal WM capacity was found in a study as a good predictor for reading comprehension in children rather than spatial WM [8]. There are also other studies indicating the relationship between reading skills and verbal WM capacity [9, 10]. Another study questioning the role of age in WM capacity found that while verbal WM capacity is protected across years, the capacity for visual–spatial WM declines in time [11]. The results of the above-mentioned studies support the domain-specific view in the field of working memory. On top of all these studies pointing to the difference between verbal and spatial WM and supporting the domain-specific view, the present study conducted with healthy university students indicates a positive correlation between the visual and verbal WM capacity of individuals. Our study contrasts other research and supports the domain’s general view. Similar research suggests a common storage for verbal, spatial or visuospatial WM as indicated in the present study [1, 12, 13]. When evaluated in terms of multitasking, the result of a very recent study researching the verbal and visuospatial WM capacity within a multitasking concept in which a Bayesian state-trace analysis was used indicated that while dealing with more than one task at the same time, a common pool for verbal and visuospatial data is used which supports the domain-general view [14]. Considering all of these studies, it can be speculated that domain-general and domain-specific tendencies may differ with regard to the scenario, cognitive load, age, psychological state, and other relevant indicators. The results that we endorse in this study support the domain’s general view.
2. The working memory capacity and cognitive emotion regulation
Emerging studies reveal that any cognitive activity of high importance, such as decision-making, inhibition, language learning, etc., is connected with another cognitive behavior related to memory consolidation, evaluative thinking, and so on, addressing us to conceive that cognitive activities process within unitary systems. Cognitive emotion regulation is one of these important cognitive activities and has an untaught association with relevant cognitive processes. Additionally, the innate tendency of individuals to cope with emotions is instinctively shaped by their learned strategies, and these strategies are either adaptive or maladaptive strategies with which individuals tend to lower their stress levels arising from the acute problem. The role of memory herein in this process is open to question. Before discussing the role of memory, it might be of great importance to highlight that a growing body of literature with mounting evidence points to the memory systems, rather than a single memory pool. Recent approaches focus on the role of working memory in terms of the rationale that it is defined as having a connection with other subsystems and evaluated as a “capacity”. Individuals with high working memory capacity, in its simplest definition, have the capacity to connect the information that is temporarily kept in the short-term memory to the relevant information in the long-term memory. By doing so, this capacity lessens the cognitive load. As the involvement of emotion during this cognitive process is inevitable, an adaptive regulation of it might also lessen the cognitive load, quicken the cognitive process, and contribute to the accurate processing of the cognitive regulation. Another rationale behind this prediction would be that if the cognitive process functions accurately in one system, then other systems can saliently function in an appropriate way, which is the exact regulation of activities and emotions. McRae & Gross [15] describe the role of emotion regulation within peoples’ tendency to use strategies against discrepancies and contradictions in their emotional situation and the realities that they face. Being an unconscious process, cognitive emotion regulation can also be defined as the ability to function with the aim of balancing emotions. This process aims to lessen the stress level and get off the discrepancies. Accumulating studies conducted for researching the relation between emotion and memory revealed that people with high working memory capacity are prone to using more emotion regulation strategies [16], and working memory training contributes to the adaptive use of emotion regulation [17, 18, 19]. The results collected from these studies point to the fact that emotion and memory are associated, work reciprocally, and affect each other’s functioning process as well as contributing to its accuracy if adopted adaptively. As cognitive emotion regulation and working memory capacity are predictors of some psychological disorders, such as depression, anxiety, and trauma-related disorders, this association must be evaluated within the perspectives of neuroplasticity, cognitive skills and associative memory, as some studies suggest [20].
3. The working memory capacity and cognitive flexibility
What working memory does is simply to switch between subsystems of memory while keeping the data to-be-encoded vivid. During this switching process, the working memory evidently works on the data and in the background, the attention is tried to be kept on it. This process is expressed as a capacity as it differs from person to person and is effected both by internal and external factors. Thus, the functions of working memory can be saliently framed in the fact that this process is a flexible and ongoing process as well as being open to the manipulation of these external and internal stimuli. In this regard, a possible association between working memory capacity and cognitive flexibility would reveal a scenario in which they act reciprocally. Cognitive flexibility can be defined as an ability with which more than one cognitive task can be handled, and it is one of the most prominent higher-order cognitive functions [21]. Explicitly linked to complex cognitive functions, it can be manipulated that this ability might decrease with aging as well as being affected by depression, anxiety and trauma like other cognitive functions [22]. Cognitive flexibility might be placed next to the definition of “task switching” in terms of pointing to its cognitive ground. Additionally, cognitive flexibility is a crucial facet in all branches of life as it necessitates being somehow skilled at finalizing a task, doing multiple tasks simultaneously without being distracted by the current task, and having psychological adjustment to adapt to the current situation. Its relation with working memory is still a question waiting to be answered. Some studies with healthy individuals have primarily focused on the relationship between Working Memory Capacity (WMC) and cognitive flexibility, and they indicated that those two cognitive processes predict creative thinking processes [23]. Other important issues might arise regarding how one controls these cognitive processes, which is highly advised to be studied. Working memory functions in association with multiple subsystems utilize various tasks in multiple concepts, and likewise, cognitive flexibility is related to the cognitive adaptation of an individual to various situations by doing multiple tasks. Thus, the important issue that arises here is that an advantageous working memory capacity might predict the cognitive flexibility of individuals. With the aim of understanding this possible reciprocal association, further studies must be carried out, and this logical rationale must be hypostasized. Further studies with larger samples might contribute to understanding how cognitive processes function and how much they are associative.
4. Discussing the reciprocal associations of cognitive functions
Our primary objective with this chapter is to delve into the logic behind the associations among working memory capacity, cognitive flexibility and the use of cognitive emotion regulation strategies, all of which have cognitive grounds. The results of our latest research have been elaborated in this review paper, which indicated that there is a significant difference and negative correlation between a working memory task, an Operation Span Task and an adaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategy that is Refocus on Planning. The findings of the research in question also indicated reciprocal correlations between Cognitive Emotion Regulation strategies. When findings collected from the Cognitive Flexibility scale were evaluated, they indicated a strong positive relationship between Refocus on Planning and Positive Reappraisal as cognitive emotion regulation strategies. Apart from this, Cognitive Flexibility was not found to be correlated with working memory capacity.
4.1 Understanding the relation between working memory capacity and cognitive emotion regulation strategies
Emotions are affective processes supporting or limiting cognitive abilities or vice versa supported or limited by cognitive processes, which can saliently highlight the fact that emotions find their expressions through cognitive processes as well as cognitive processes are not independent of emotions. It is next to impossible to evaluate emotions and cognitive processes separately, let alone cognitive emotion regulation strategies. Except that their regulation strategies and the coping mechanism that they adopt are adaptive or maladaptive, individuals have innate tendencies for coping with a problem with the aim of protecting the unity in their self, identity and memory. This tendency might be framed within an adaptive solution as in
With the aim of understanding the reciprocal relation between working memory capacity and the use of cognitive emotion regulation strategies, a comparison analysis was conducted in our latest research. The results collected from the Operation Span Task, a nonspatial and verbal task measuring the working memory capacity of an individual, illustrated that the WM capacity is significantly different from one of the adaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies of individuals, that is the Refocus on Planning strategy and is strongly correlated with it. Refocus on Planning is an adaptive strategy with which individuals focus on possible solutions in order to manage their emotions [24]. On the other hand, WM capacity is robustly related to fluid intelligence [25, 26, 27, 28], executive functions [29, 30, 31] and executive attention [32]. Focusing on the fact that Refocus on Planning is an adaptive strategy supporting the resilience in patients with depression and anxiety disorders [33], and this adaptive strategy is associated with more positive emotions because of the fact that individuals have lower anxiety symptoms when they design more plans for their problems [34], the low working memory capacity then necessitates more plans. In other words, the rationale behind this result would be that individuals with low working memory capacity might have the tendency of adopting more plans as well as refocusing on them as they cannot, on a balance of probabilities, rely on their working memory capacity which is a capacity of establishing an association between the subsystems of memory. Further studies must be conducted with regard to this association of working memory capacity and cognitive emotion regulation.
4.2 “Acceptance” as a cognitive emotion regulation strategy: is it adaptive or maladaptive?
Cognitive Emotion Regulation Strategies are adopted with the aim of managing a stressful or traumatic life event or a problem in order to protect the self. Adopting these strategies can end up either with self-injury, as in Self-blame or Catastrophizing, or by imposing its results on others, as in other-blame. Individuals might also feel lost in the loop of rumination, which is a destructive way of dealing with a problem and mostly ends with an increase in the level of stress. In other words, these are common maladaptive strategies for managing a problem that are not successful in relieving it, let alone finding a solution. Being antecedent-focused or response-focused, cognitive emotion regulation strategies can be adaptive, though. An adaptive way for individuals to deal with a problem might resemble like putting the Problem into Perspective, or Refocusing on Planning with the aim of handling a problem objectively, or employing Positive Reappraisal in order to see the contribution of the problem from a positive perspective. These strategies can be utilized together, and an adaptive strategy is expected to be associated with another adaptive strategy, rather than a maladaptive one. Our latest research questioned this associative relation, and the findings highlighted that cognitive emotion regulation strategies are correlated positively.
Taking Acceptance as an example, which is defined as accepting emotional experiences without manipulating them [35], it is contemplated as being correlated with positive matters [36]. Acceptance can be defined as an adaptive strategy as it can be saliently associated with consciousness while dealing with a stressful event, a contrary situation that might lead to psychopathology [37, 38] and anxiety disorders [38, 39]. Suppressed emotions or ideas can be dissociated when they are found unbearable. Contrarily, Acceptance might be more than dissociating by denying or suppressing it, but having a tendency for relieving stress. There are numerous studies illustrating that Acceptance contributes to reducing anxiety or depression [40], and healthy people prefer Acceptance as a strategy for regulating their emotions on a cognitive ground [41]. On the other hand, surprising results of some studies point to the association of Acceptance with negative emotions, depressive symptoms and self-injury [42, 43]. This contradiction raises the problem that the place of Acceptance is ambiguous. When the results of our latest research are formulated, they indicate that Acceptance, Rumination, Self-blame and Catastrophizing function similarly. This result typically reveals that maladaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies such as Rumination and Self-blame can be associated with an adaptive-looking maladaptive strategy, that is Acceptance. Rumination is the continuous contemplation of negative situations from negative perspectives. Rumination is employed by individuals diagnosed with Euthymic Bipolar Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder [44] and individuals with internalizing problems [45], and it has a role in mediating the relationship between anxiety problems and their consequent interference [46]. There are mounting studies pointing to the association of Rumination with Acceptance, other blame, and reduced Positive Reappraisal with maladaptive anger suppression [47]. Therefore, Acceptance is found to be associative either with adaptive or maladaptive coping strategies in various studies. This contradiction in results might allow us to address some claims that Acceptance is an adaptive-looking maladaptive strategy on the cognitive ground. Individuals having tendency to adopt Acceptance as a strategy for coping with a stressful event might increase their stress level as the nature of Acceptance might subconsciously evoke some feelings of being the victim of a sort of stressful situation as well as feeling less capable. These feelings are inevitably related to Self-blame. Another scenario would be that individuals accepting the situation as it is might find it difficult to resolve it, which is possibly why they directly accept it without any manipulation. Additionally, the result of our latest research revealed the relationship between Acceptance and Catastrophizing. Accumulating evidence from various research studies pointed out that Catastrophizing is associated with violent behaviors and somatic complaints [48, 49] and is mostly adopted by individuals diagnosed with euthymic bipolar disorder and Major Depressive Disorder [44]. This association also points to the same contradiction and allows us to address some claims that Acceptance can function as an adaptive strategy in some situations while some situations might turn it into a maladaptive one.
4.3 Reciprocal relationship among adaptive and maladaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies
Individuals cope with problems in various ways by adopting different coping strategies. Strategies that contribute to resolving the problem as well as lowering the level of stress are defined as adaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies. Our latest research focused on correlations among adaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies and found them correlative. One adaptive coping strategy is Positive Refocusing, which finds its expression within the definition of focusing on the positive sides of the situation. There are various studies that have examined the contributions of Positive Refocusing, and they revealed that it is associated with externalizing problems and lowers the level of anxiety and depression [40, 45]. In our latest research, we found that Positive Refocusing is positively correlated with Refocus on Planning, which is saliently a cognitive strategy to handle stressful life events with resilience [50]. Numerous studies indicate the contribution of Positive Refocusing on the healthy and accurate mental process during regulating emotions [33, 43, 51]. What is more, Refocus on Planning was also found to be positively correlated with Positive Reappraisal, which is another adaptive strategy reducing the effect of negative events, such as bullying [52] and Putting into Perspective, an adaptive version of emotion regulation on the cognitive ground which is effective as an alternative to treatment [53]. Additionally, Positive Reappraisal and Putting into Perspective were also found correlative. Positive Reappraisal is the re-evaluation of the current stressful situation from a positive perspective, and a recent study revealed that high-trait-anxious women use the Positive Reappraisal strategy unsatisfactorily [54]. Our latest research found a negative correlation between Positive Reappraisal and Catastrophizing, a maladaptive strategy, which is mostly associated with negative feelings, violent behavior, somatic complaints, rumination, self-blame, other-blame, anxiety problems, and their consequent interference [44, 46, 48, 49]. The findings of our study contribute to the existing literature as it points to the nature of cognitive emotion regulation strategies, which are negatively correlated in terms of being adaptive and maladaptive.
When maladaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies are evaluated, it can be explicitly acknowledged that they change reciprocally and predict each other. An individual tending to adopt a maladaptive strategy might be expected to utilize other maladaptive strategies with different scenarios. Thus, our latest research revealed positive correlations among maladaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies. Self-blame and Rumination are maladaptive coping strategies associated with depressive modes, somatic complaints, anxiety problems and violent behavior [42, 46, 48, 49]. Numerous studies highlight the relationship between catastrophizing, rumination, self-blame and other-blame and anxiety problems, their consequent interference and problematic online gaming [46, 55]. When individuals are trained to gain perspectives in resolving a stressful problem, this association between maladaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies might change them with adaptive ones. Therefore, in order to disrupt the domino effect of maladaptive strategies, cognitive emotion regulation training is highly recommended.
4.4 The nature of cognitive flexibility and its association with cognitive emotion regulation strategies
Characterized by being explicitly related to task switching, adapting to new changing situations, handling two or more tasks simultaneously, and focusing on the task while inhibiting irrelevant stimulus, cognitive flexibility is an ability of great importance for advancing cognitive processes and, apart from being aware of alternatives for a situation waiting to be resolved, it is also about being willing to adapt to this situation with a high self-efficacy [56]. In addition to these cognitive advantages, cognitive flexibility can also be an advantage in understanding emotions [57]. On the other hand, a possible relationship between cognitive flexibility and cognitive emotion regulation would be discussed in terms of adaptive strategies because of the nature of cognitive flexibility that is far from being maladaptive. In other words, cognitive flexibility is a quite adaptive cognitive process adopted with the aim of resolving a matter. As in cognitive flexibility, adaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies help individuals manage their problems accurately. Our latest research reported that cognitive flexibility is associated and correlated with Refocus on Planning and Positive Reappraisal. Functioning as adaptive mechanisms, Refocus on Planning and Positive Reappraisal help individuals deal with a problem with lucidity by approaching the negative and stressful situation with a different perspective as well as evaluating possible positive aspects of it. Thus, the rationale behind the association of cognitive flexibility with two adaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies would be that individuals with high levels of cognitive flexibility also innately adapt to multitasking in an adaptive way or vice versa; their cognitive flexibility skill might shape their way of handling a problem in an effective way which is possibly the reason why they use adaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies.
5. Conclusion
Nature of working memory capacity can be capsulated within the definition of remembering and processing simultaneously. Its association with other cognitive processes finds its expression through the fact that it is a dynamic and active process reciprocally affecting other cognitive abilities, as in language learning [58, 59]. There is a growing body of literature questioning its association with other cognitive systems in various fields, such as cognitive psychology, neuropsychology as well as educational sciences. Studies conducted in this regard are performed by healthy individuals or those diagnosed with various psychological disorders. Therewithal, it should be acknowledged that an interdisciplinary perspective should be adopted for evaluating these explicit associations of each cognitive function with the other. For instance, a traumatic individual’s approach to resolving a matter, remembering it, or deciding about it will definitely differ from the one who has not experienced a recent trauma. In a dissociated individual who becomes a subject with a psychiatric diagnosis due to a traumatic event that affects his/her consciousness, memory, identity and even autonomy because of individual and social traumas, when a recurrent flow of external traumatic stimuli evolves into a recurrent flow of internal traumatic stimuli, the emergence of the “traumatic self” is experienced [60]. This way, the traumatic self might be expected to be less skilled in resolving a stressful event, making a decision on it, thinking flexibly, regulating his/her emotions in an adaptive way as well as associating information in their short-term memory with their long-term memory, as working memory does. In other words, a trauma might have a domino effect on the cognitive processes. Trauma is only one small example explaining this effect. There are numerous studies pointing to the effect and association of psychological situations and cognitive abilities on each other. Individuals with low self-esteem employ avoidant and panic decision-making style, acute stress increases the possibility of decision-making failures and the functions of working memory and action-state orientation predicts self-control, all of which highlight this association [61, 62, 63]. Thus, an interdisciplinary perspective is advised to be adopted to discuss it.
What we questioned and researched in our latest study was the reciprocal association among some of these executive functions. The working memory capacity of individuals were determined with complex span tasks and the result was compared with their cognitive flexibility level, and tendencies for utilizing cognitive emotion regulation strategies. The overall result of the study indicated a relationship between working memory capacity and cognitive emotion regulation strategies. Another significant result was the association between cognitive flexibility and adaptive cognitive emotion regulation strategies. The findings of our research did not point to a relation between working memory capacity and cognitive flexibility. These results might provide a comprehensive understanding of the associations between cognitive processes. It should also be highlighted that individuals with a high level of cognitive flexibility can multitask, and this ability contributes to the regulation of their emotions, which is why cognitive flexibility training is another issue to be handled and developed for improving multitasking skills as well as regulating emotions.
Acknowledgments
We especially thank all our students in the Science Club of Istanbul Gelisim University and Istanbul Nisantasi University who volunteered their time to our study.
References
- 1.
Li D, Christ SE, Cowan N. Domain-general and domain-specific functional networks in working memory. NeuroImage. 2014; 102 :646-656 - 2.
Martin RC, Rapp B, Purcell J. Domain-specific working memory: Perspectives from cognitive neuropsychology. In: Working Memory: State of the Science. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press; 2020. pp. 235-287 - 3.
Baddeley A. Working Memory. New York: Oxford University Press; 1986 - 4.
Cowan N. Attention and Memory: An Integrated Framework. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press; 1998 - 5.
Owen AM, Iddon JL, Hodges JR, Summers BA, Robbins TW. Spatial and non-spatial WM at different stages of Parkinson’s disease. Neuropsychologia. 1997; 35 (4):519-532 - 6.
Li Z, Chen J, Feng Y, Zhong S, Tian S, Dai Z, et al. Differences in verbal and spatial WM in patients with bipolar II and unipolar depression: An MSI study. BMC Psychiatry. 2021; 21 (1):1-11 - 7.
Demir ÖE, Prado J, Booth JR. The differential role of verbal and spatial WM in the neural basis of arithmetic. Developmental Neuropsychology. 2014; 39 (6):440-458. DOI: 10.1080/87565641.2014.939182 - 8.
Oakhill J, Yuill N, Garnham A. The differential relations between verbal, numerical and spatial WM abilities and children's reading comprehension. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education. 2011; 4 (1):83-106 - 9.
De Jong PF. Understanding normal and impaired reading development: A WM perspective. In: WM and Education. United States: Academic Press; 2006. pp. 33-60 - 10.
Carretti B, Borella E, Cornoldi C, De Beni R. Role of WM in explaining the performance of individuals with specific reading comprehension difficulties: A meta-analysis. Learning and Individual Differences. 2009; 19 (2):246-251 - 11.
Swanson HL. Verbal and visual-spatial WM: What develops over a life span? Developmental Psychology. 2017; 53 (5):971 - 12.
Jarrold C, Tam H, Baddeley AD, Harvey CE. How does processing affect storage in working memory tasks? Evidence for both domain-general and domain-specific effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2011; 37 (3):688-705. DOI: 10.1037/a0022527 - 13.
Ashkenazi S, Rosenberg-Lee M, Metcalfe AW, Swigart AG, Menon V. Visuo–spatial working memory is an important source of domain-general vulnerability in the development of arithmetic cognition. Neuropsychologia. 2013; 51 (11):2305-2317 - 14.
Vergauwe E, von Bastian CC, Kostova R, Morey CC. Storage and processing in working memory: A single, domain-general resource explains multitasking. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General. 2022; 151 (2):285-301. DOI: 10.1037/xge0000895 - 15.
McRae K, Gross JJ. Emotion regulation. Emotion. 2020; 20 (1):1-9. DOI: 10.1037/emo0000703 - 16.
Jasielska A, Kaczmarek L, Brońska A, Dominiak M, Niemier K, Patalas D, et al. The relationship between WM and emotion regulation strategies. Roczniki Psychologiczne. 2015; 18 (4):567-578 - 17.
Xiu L, Zhou R, Jiang Y. WM training improves emotion regulation ability, evidence from HRV. Physiological Behavior. 2016; 155 :25-29. DOI: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2015.12.004 - 18.
Martin RC, Bridgett DJ, Mayes LC, Rutherford HJ. Maternal WM, emotion regulation, and responsivity to infant distress. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. 2020; 71 :101202 - 19.
Deng Y, Hou L, Chen X, Zhou R. WM training improves emotion regulation in drug abstainers, evidence from frontal alpha asymmetry. Neuroscience Letters. 2021; 742 :135513 - 20.
Aydın S. Cross-validated adaboost classification of emotion regulation strategies identified by spectral coherence in resting-state. Neuroinformatics. 2022; 20 (3):627-639 - 21.
Magnusson KR, Brim BL. The aging brain. In: Brim BL, editor. Reference Module in Biomedical Sciences. Burlington, MA: Elsevier; 2014 - 22.
Miyake A, Friedman NP, Emerson MJ, Witzki AH, Howerter A, Wager TD. The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks, A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology. 2000; 41 (1):49-100 - 23.
Figueroa I, Do WM. Capacity and Cognitive Flexibility Predict Creative Thinking and Production? United States: George Mason University; 2017 - 24.
Garnefski N, Van Den Kommer T, Kraaij V, Teerds J, Legerstee J, Onstein E. The relationship between cognitive emotion regulation strategies and emotional problems, comparison between a clinical and a non-clinical sample. European Journal of Personality. 2002; 16 (5):403-420. DOI: 10.1002/per.458 - 25.
Cochrane A, Green CS. Trajectories of performance change indicate multiple dissociable links between working memory and fluid intelligence. NPJ Science Learning. 2021; 6 :33. DOI: 10.1038/s41539-021-00111-w - 26.
Kanerva K, Kalakoski V. The predictive utility of a WM span task depends on processing demand and the cognitive task. Applied Cognitive Psychology. 2016; 30 (5):681-690 - 27.
Lucidi A, Loaiza V, Camos V, Barrouillet P. Assessing WM capacity through time-constrained elementary activities. The Journal of General Psychology. 2014; 141 (2):98-112 - 28.
Unsworth N, Redick TS, Heitz RP, Broadway JM, Engle RW. Complex WM span tasks and higher-order cognition, a latent-variable analysis of the relationship between processing and storage. Memory. 2009; 17 (6):635-654 - 29.
Cartwright KB. Insights from cognitive neuroscience, The importance of executive function for early reading development and education. Early Education & Development. 2012; 23 (1):24-36 - 30.
Miyake A, Friedman NP. The nature and organization of individual differences in executive functions, four general conclusions. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2012; 21 (1):8-14 - 31.
Willoughby MT, Kupersmidt JB, Voegler-Lee ME. Is preschool executive function causally related to academic achievement? Child Neuropsychology. 2012; 18 (1):79-91 - 32.
Unsworth N, Engle RW. The nature of individual differences in WM capacity, active maintenance in primary memory and controlled search from secondary memory. Psychological Review. 2007; 114 (1):104 - 33.
Min JA, Yu JJ, Lee CU, Chae JH. Cognitive emotion regulation strategies contributing to resilience in patients with depression and/or anxiety disorders. Comprehensive Psychiatry. 2013; 54 (8):1190-1197 - 34.
Sacchi L, Dan-Glauser E. Never too late to plan, “Refocus on planning” as an effective way to lower symptoms and difficulties in emotion regulation during the COVID-19 first lockdown. Emotion. 2021; 21 (7):1483 - 35.
Levitt JT, Brown TA, Orsillo SM, Barlow DH. The effects of acceptance versus suppression of emotion on subjective and psychophysiological response to carbon dioxide challenge in patients with panic disorder. Behavior Therapy. 2004; 35 (4):747-766 - 36.
Hayes SC, Strosahl KD, Wilson KG. Acceptance and Commitment Therapy: An Experiential Approach to Behavior Change. New York: Guilford Press; 1999 - 37.
Ehring T, Quack D. Emotion regulation difficulties in trauma survivors, The role of trauma type and PTSD symptom severity. Behavior Therapy. 2010; 41 (4):587-598 - 38.
Tull MT, Barrett HM, McMillan ES, Roemer L. A preliminary investigation of the relationship between emotion regulation difficulties and posttraumatic stress symptoms. Behavior Therapy. 2007; 38 (3):303-313 - 39.
McLaughlin KA, Mennin DS, Farach FJ. The contributory role of worry in emotion generation and dysregulation in generalized anxiety disorder. Behaviour Research and Therapy. 2007; 45 (8):1735-1752 - 40.
Wang QQ , Fang YY, Huang HL, Lv WJ, Wang XX, Yang TT, et al. Anxiety, depression, and cognitive emotion regulation strategies in Chinese nurses during the COVID-19 outbreak. Journal of Nursing Management. 2021; 29 (5):1263-1274 - 41.
Mazaheri M, Afshar H, Nikneshan S, Adibi P. Cognitive emotion regulation strategies in patients with functional dyspepsia and healthy controls: A comparative study. Advanced Biomedical Research. 2016; 2016 :5 - 42.
Lei H, Zhang X, Cai L, Wang Y, Bai M, Zhu X. Cognitive emotion regulation strategies in outpatients with major depressive disorder. Psychiatry Research. 2014; 218 (1-2):87-92 - 43.
Madjar N, Segal N, Eger G, Shoval G. Exploring particular facets of cognitive emotion regulation and their relationships with nonsuicidal self-injury among adolescents. Crisis. Jul 2019; 40 (4):280-286 - 44.
Wolkenstein L, Zwick JC, Hautzinger M, Joormann J. Cognitive emotion regulation in euthymic bipolar disorder. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2014; 160 :92-97 - 45.
Garnefski N, Kraaij V, van Etten M. Specificity of relations between adolescents’ cognitive emotion regulation strategies and internalizing and externalizing psychopathology. Journal of Adolescence. 2005; 28 (5):619-631 - 46.
Rodríguez-Menchón M, Orgilés M, Fernández-Martínez I, Espada JP, Morales A. Rumination, catastrophizing, and other-blame, the cognitive-emotional regulation strategies involved in anxiety-related life interference in anxious children. Child Psychiatry & Human Development. 2021; 52 (1):63-76 - 47.
Martin RC, Dahlen ER. Cognitive emotion regulation in the prediction of depression, anxiety, stress, and anger. Personality and Individual Differences. 2005; 39 (7):1249-1260. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2005.06.004 - 48.
Bao P, Jing J, Yang WH, Li XH, Cai YS. Violence-related behaviors among adolescents and its association with cognitive emotion regulation strategies. World Journal of Pediatrics. 2016; 12 (1):82-87 - 49.
Garnefski N, van Rood Y, De Roos C, Kraaij V. Relationships between traumatic life events, cognitive emotion regulation strategies, and somatic complaints. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings. 2017; 24 (2):144-151 - 50.
Li L, Zhu X, Yang Y, He J, Yi J, Wang Y, et al. Cognitive emotion regulation, characteristics and effect on quality of life in women with breast cancer. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes. 2015; 13 (1):1-10 - 51.
Bernuzzi C, Setti I, Maffoni M, Sommovigo V. From moral distress to burnout through work-family conflict, the protective role of resilience and positive refocusing. Ethics & Behavior. 2021; 2021 :1-23 - 52.
Garnefski N, Kraaij V. Bully victimization and emotional problems in adolescents, moderation by specific cognitive coping strategies? Journal of Adolescence. 2014; 37 (7):1153-1160 - 53.
Wisco BE, Sloan DM, Marx BP. Cognitive emotion regulation and written exposure therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder. Clinical Psychological Science. 2013; 1 (4):435-442 - 54.
Qi S, Basanovic J, Wang L, Xiang S, Hu W, Yi X. Regulation of negative emotions through positive reappraisal and distancing in high-trait-anxious women. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2020; 267 :191-202 - 55.
Kökönyei G, Kocsel N, Király O, Griffiths MD, Galambos A, Magi A, et al. The role of cognitive emotion regulation strategies in problem gaming among adolescents, a nationally representative survey study. Frontiers in Psychiatry. 2019; 10 :273 - 56.
Martin MM, Rubin RB. A new measure of cognitive flexibility. Psychological Reports. 1995; 76 :623-626 - 57.
Wang X, Liu X, Feng T. The continuous impact of cognitive flexibility on the development of emotion understanding in children aged 4 and 5 years: A longitudinal study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 2021; 203 :105018 - 58.
Baddeley A. Working memory and language: An overview. Journal of Communication Disorders. 2003; 36 (3):189-208 - 59.
Ercetin G. Working memory and L2 reading: Theoretical and methodological issues. ELT Research Journal. 2015; 4 (2):101-110 - 60.
Ozturk E. Shared dissociative identity disorder and defector alter personality: Controlled human syndrome and the objectification trap phenomenon as a gaslighting form based on dissociative narcissism from the perspective of dissoanalysis theory and dissoanalytic psychohistory. Medicine. Science. 2023; 2023 :12 - 61.
Yesilbursa CC, Yalin FA. Sosyal Bilgiler Ogretmen Adaylarinin Karar Vermede Oz Saygi ve Karar Verme Stillerinin Incelenmesi. Turkish Studies-Educational Sciences. 2021; 16 (5):2512-2528 - 62.
Yilmaz S, Kafadar H. Decision-making under stress: Executive functions, analytical intelligence, somatic markers, and personality traits in young adults. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult. 2022; 2022 :1-15 - 63.
Gross D, Kohlmann CW. Predicting self-control capacity–taking into account working memory capacity, motivation, and heart rate variability. Acta Psychologica. 2020; 209 :103131