Verbal and spatial working memory, and verbal attention span, explain unique variance in Coding beyond motor speed, symptom severity, and IQ¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2011 · checked against its sources 2026-10-17 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? Verbal attention/span, verbal working memory, and spatial working memory each added significant unique variance to Coding models (total R2 ranging .594-.633), while reaction time, intra-subject variability, inhibition, and naming speed did not. → Jacobson 2011
Evidence¶
Jacobson 2011¶
Jacobson, L. A., Ryan, M., Martin, R. B., Ewen, J., Mostofsky, S. H., Denckla, M. B., & Mahone, E. M. (2011). Working Memory Influences Processing Speed and Reading Fluency in ADHD. Child Neuropsychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/09297049.2010.532204
q3 · i? · associational · r2
Supplemental hierarchical regressions entered seven hypothesized constructs after sex, Coding Copy, CPRS-R Scale N, and GAI. "The total R2 for the models including these three constructs ranged from .594 to .633"; verbal span (ΔR2 = .094, p = .016), verbal WM (ΔR2 = .076, p = .025), and spatial WM (ΔR2 = .115, p = .012) were significant.
"The total R2 for the models including these three constructs ranged from .594 to .633, indicating that these models accounted for up to 63.3 percent of the variance in Coding scores."
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Spatial Ability — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes
- Visual Processing — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes
- Working Memory — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes
Related Claims¶
- Children with ADHD perform worse than controls on WISC-IV Coding but not on Coding Copy, indicating deficits beyond graphomotor speed — related
- Verbal working memory predicts oral reading fluency in children with and without ADHD — related
- Vocabulary scores predicted executive-loaded non-verbal working memory scores beyond age and non-verbal reasoning — related
- Visuo-spatial working memory and inhibition jointly predict mathematics performance in 9–10-year-old children — related
- Short-term memory task profiles differ by age: 7–8-year-olds show no verbal–spatial difference, while 9–10-year-olds show a verbal > visuo-spatial > motor gradient. — related
- Verbally gifted adolescents with ADHD show poor recall and recognition on online memorization despite strong verbal fluency
- Non-graphomotor processing speed (residualized Coding) predicts oral reading fluency similarly in children with and without ADHD — related
- IQ and working memory are reliable predictors of academic achievement at the beginning of school when domain knowledge is not controlled — a broader claim this one bears on
- Skill-specific genetic variance in working memory and processing speed predicts reading components — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
working-memory-explains-coding-variance |
title |
Verbal and spatial working memory, and verbal attention span, explain unique variance in Coding beyond motor speed, symptom severity, and IQ |
description |
Verbal and spatial working memory, and verbal attention span, explain unique variance in Coding beyond motor speed, symptom severity, and IQ |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2011 |
source_checked |
2026-10-17 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-17 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — jacobson-2011 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.