Introduction

Memory can simply be defined as a cognitive process to store and retrieve

information. It is an active system that receives information from the senses, puts information

into a usable form, organises it as it stores away, and then retrieves the information from

storage (adapted from Baddeley, 1996, 2003). The three processes of memory include the

following:

• Encoding (sensory input or stimulus information is encoded)

• Storage (retention of encoded information)

• Retrieval (retrieving information whenever required)

As per the information- processing model (also known as the Atkinson Shiffrin

model), there are three types of memory systems:

• Sensory memory (raw information from the senses is held for a very brief

period of time; can be classified into iconic and echoic memory)

• Short-term memory (information is held for a brief period of time while being

used)

• Long-term memory (information is placed to be kept more or less permanently)

Short-term Memory:

Short-term memory is the second level store of memory and is limited in capacity and

retention time. Short-term memory is responsible for holding any information currently

needed to complete a task as well as important information from sensory memory. However,

this information is displaced by new information after just a few seconds (Miller, 2011).

Short-term memory has three essential features: capacity, duration, and encoding. Its duration

1
is usually between 15 and 30 seconds, and its capacity is approximately seven items. Without

rehearsal, short-term memory has a limited duration of about 18 seconds.

Working memory and short-term memory are not entirely distinct from each other.

The term "working memory" was first introduced by Miller and colleagues (1960) to describe

memory as it is used for planning and executing behaviour. In the field, "working memory"

became more widely used after Baddeley and Hitch's (1974) research showed that a single

module could not account for all types of temporary memory. Based on their findings, an

influential model came into existence (Baddeley, 1986) where verbal-phonological and

visual-spatial representations were held separately and managed and manipulated with the

help of attention-related processes, termed the central executive.

The Digit Span Test:

The Digit Span test is one of the memory span tests used for measuring short-term

memory. The concept of Digit Span as a psychological construct was first proposed by

Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716). He proposed that individuals have a finite capacity to hold

and process information from their environment. He called this capacity the span of

apperception. In the 19th century, cognitive scientist Herman Ebbinghaus used span as an

experimental paradigm to study memory and learning. From the beginning, virtually all

Wechsler intelligence and memory scales for both children and adults have included a Digit

Span subtest. Wechsler combined the results of the digits forward and digits backward tasks

into a single score based on psychometric considerations.

The Digit Span test is a commonly used method for assessing attention-concentration

and working memory (Ryan, Lopez & Paolo, 1996; Ostrosky-Solís & Lozano, 2006). This

test is often included as part of neuropsychological and mental state examinations (Ryan,

Lopez & Paolo, 1996) due to its portability and ease of use. The test includes both digit

2
forward and digit backward conditions, wherein a series of digit strings are read out to

participants who are then required to repeat them in the same or reverse order of presentation.

Successful performance on the test relies on auditory attention and short-term verbal memory

(Ostrosky-Solís & Lozano, 2006). Studies have shown that performance on the Digit Span

test is more closely tied to the integrity of the left hemisphere of the brain, rather than the

right hemisphere or diffuse damage (Lezak, Howieson & Loring, 2004).

The Digit Span test is commonly used in Indian settings by researchers and clinicians

to evaluate attention and working memory. In clinical settings, variations of the Digit Span

test are used to evaluate memory and working memory deficits. For example, the Backward

Digits Test (BDT) assesses working memory deficits in dementia. It involves trials of 3, 4,

and 5-digit spans, totalling 21 trials (Wambach et al., 2011).

Theoretical Framework

Levels of Processing Model:

This model of memory was proposed by Craik and Lockhart in 1972. According to this

model, the more deeply information is processed during encoding, the better it will be

remembered.

• Shallow processing: It involves processing information on a superficial level, such

as its physical characteristics or appearance.

• Intermediate processing: It involves slightly deeper analysis of information, such as

categorizing or recognizing patterns. This level of processing involves some degree of

semantic processing, but it still does not deeply engage with the meaning or

significance of the information.

• Deep processing: It involves elaborative rehearsal and meaningful engagement with

the information. This level of processing involves thinking about the meaning,

3
 significance, and relevance of the information being encoded. When information is

processed deeply, it is more likely to be remembered over the long term.

The levels of processing model suggests that memory is not simply a product of

repetition or rote memorization but rather a result of the depth of cognitive processing during

encoding. According to this model, deep processing leads to better memory performance

because it creates stronger and more elaborate memory traces.

Tulving’s Model:

Tulving in the year 1972 proposed a model that categorizes memory as short-term and

long-term. Long-term memory is further divided into three categories: episodic memory,

semantic memory, and procedural memory. Episodic memory consists of personal

experiences, while semantic memory involves the accumulation of facts and organized

knowledge over a lifetime. Procedural memory deals with skill learning and the acquisition of

how-to knowledge.

Cowan’s Embedded Processes Model:

Nelson Cowan defined working memory as a cognitive process that allows us to retain

both old and new information in an accessible state, which we can use to perform mental

tasks. Cowan hypothesized that working memory is a combination of embedded processes

from attention and long-term memory. It is worth noting that if a whole process is activated

without aiding a task, it's still considered a part of working memory (like the verbal encoding

of meaningless shapes).

4
Validity

The Digit Span test displays moderate criterion validity with the Stanford-Binet-IV

composite score and short-term memory, with correlation coefficients of r = 0.48 and r =

0.52, respectively.

Review of Literature

Ramirez & Harris (2023)- In this research, the relationship between Hispanic Spanish-

English bilingualism and performance on the Digit Span task was investigated. The study

included 82 Hispanic Spanish-English bilinguals (average age: 29.11 years; average

education: 15.68 years; 53.7% female). Participants completed the Language and Social

Background Questionnaire (LSBQ) and the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - Fourth

Edition (WAIS-IV) Digit Span subtest via Zoom. LSBQ composite factor scores significantly

predicted Digit Span Forward and Longest Digit Span Forward scores. Bilingual experiences

did not significantly predict Digit Span Backward, Digit Span Sequencing, Digit Span

Total, Longest Digit Span Backward, or Longest Digit Span Sequencing scores.

Tripathi et al. (2019)-The study aimed to explore the usefulness of the Digit Span

test for Indian older adults with different levels of education. The sample included 258

community-dwelling healthy normal older adults in India. Each participant underwent

screening, which included a semi-structured interview using the modified MINI Screen, the

Indian version of the Mini-Mental State Examination, an assessment of activities of daily

living, and a verbal administration of the Digit Span test. Participants with higher educational

levels performed significantly better than those with low education on the Digit Span test.

Low-educated participants often struggled with the test and resorted to guessing the digits.

Choi et al. (2014)-The study aimed to explore the effect of demographic variables

on Digit Span test (DS) performance in an educationally diverse elderly population and to

5
provide normative information. The DS was administered to 784 community-dwelling

volunteers aged 60-90 years with an educational history ranging from zero to 25 years of full-

time education. Individuals with serious neurological, medical, and psychiatric disorders

(including dementia) were excluded. Age, education, and gender were significantly

associated with DS performance. Based on the results obtained, DS norms were stratified by:

age (two strata), education (three strata) and gender (two strata).

Muangpaisan, Intalapaporn, & Assantachai (2010)- The purpose of the study was to

compare the performance of normal subjects and patients with amnestic MCI on the Digit

Span test and CVFT, while also examining the potential influence of age, gender, and

education on task performance. The authors gathered data from 77 participants diagnosed

with amnestic MCI and 30 normal subjects aged 50 or over who were recruited from

communities in Bangkok. The Digit Span test and CVFT (which included semantic fluency

and Controlled word association test for letter fluency) were utilized to evaluate the

participants. The results of the study indicated that MCI patients scored significantly lower on

the Digit Span test, both in Digits Forward and Digits Backward. Additionally, they exhibited

poorer performance on the semantic fluency task for animals and fruits, as well as on the

letter fluency test.

Rationale of the Experiment

The Digit Span test evaluates working memory, attention span, and short-term

memory. Understanding cognitive functioning is essential, particularly when performing

tasks that call for quick memory and processing of information. This experiment guarantees

precision and consistency in data collecting by using technologies such as PEBL software and

standard operating procedures. The test is a useful tool for both research and clinical settings

because of its ease of use and capacity to detect cognitive deficits under a variety of

6
scenarios. In order to provide light on cognitive processes essential for day-to-day

functioning and the identification of neurological diseases, this study attempts to clarify the

variations in memory span across young adults.

Sample

For this experiment, 10 participants aged between 20-25 were selected, comprising 5

females and 5 males.

Apparatus

The administration of forward Digit Span test was conducted using the PEBL

software. To conduct the experiment, the 'battery' section in PEBL software has to be opened

and the 'dspan' option needs to be selected. Then the 'digitspan.pbl' file has to be run. For

accurate results, it is recommended that the participant wears headphones and is in complete

silence.

Procedure

The participant will be shown a sequence of digits, one at a time on the screen, and

will be asked to type them in the exact order they were presented (i.e., forward direction). If

they are unsure of the next digit, they can skip it using the '-' key. It's encouraged that they try

to recall the digits in their original positions. If a mistake is made, they can correct it using

the backspace key. The participant will start with a list of 3 digits and will receive three

different lists at each length. If they can correctly recall two out of three lists, they will

proceed to the next length.

Instructions

The following instructions are to be given to each participant:

7
 “You are about to take part in a memory test. You will be presented with a sequence of

digits. Each digit will occur only once during a list. You will then be asked to type the list of

digits exactly in the order you saw them in. If you do not know what digit comes next, you

can skip over it by typing the ‘-’ key. Try to put the numbers in the original list positions. If

you make a mistake, you can use the backspace key to make a correction. You will start with

a list of three items and will get three different lists at each length. If you are able to recall

two out of three lists completely correctly, you will move on to the next longest list length”.

Ethical Considerations

To ensure ethical and proper conduct, it is necessary to obtain informed consent from

all participants. A comprehensive overview of the rules and instructions must be provided,

including an explanation of the objective and procedure of the test, while ensuring complete

confidentiality. Participation must be entirely voluntary and the test should be conducted in

an environment that is quiet and free from distractions. In case of any difficulty in typing,

participants may vocalize their response and request assistance from the examiner in typing it

out.

Score Table

Sl. No. Name of the Gender Memory Total Words Total Time

Participant Span Correct Taken (in

minutes)

1 M. P. P. Female 6 8 3.46 minutes

2 G. S. Female 7 9 4.07 minutes

3 A. M. B. Female 6 8 2.96 minutes

4 H. C. Female 7 8 4.18 minutes

5 S. D. Female 6 8 3.33 minutes

8
 6 P. U. B. Male 6 6 3.17 minutes

7 M. K. Male 9 13 5.34 minutes

8 A. K. Male 6 7 3.23 minutes

9 A. R. Male 6 8 2.91 minutes

10 P. S. Male 10 15 5.57 minutes

Average Memory Span = 6.9 (that is, approximately 7 digits)

Average of total words correct = 9

Average total time taken = 3.822 minutes

9
 Line Graph Showing The Memory Span of The Participants
12

10 10

8
Memory Span

7 7

6 6 6 6 6
Female
Male
4

0
1 2 3 4 5
Participants (5 females, 5 males)

10
Discussion

The Digit Span test is a measure of working memory capacity, specifically the ability

to temporarily hold and manipulate information. Participants are required to repeat a series of

digits in the same order as presented to them.

A high score on the forward Digit Span test suggests a better working memory

capacity. Individuals with higher scores tend to have better abilities to hold and manipulate

information in their mind temporarily. They are likely to excel in tasks that require attention,

concentration, and quick processing of information. Conversely, a low score on the forward

Digit Span test indicates a limited working memory capacity. Individuals with lower scores

might find it challenging to remember and manipulate information in their mind, which could

affect tasks that require multitasking, problem-solving, and learning.

In terms of clinical aspects, individuals who are in good health typically have a digit

span range of seven with an acceptable margin of plus or minus two. If the digit span falls

below five, it is regarded as subpar, while a range beyond nine is deemed exceptional. If the

outcome falls below average, further examinations may be necessary to identify any potential

cognitive impairments, disorders, or emotional distress. Conversely, an above-average digit

span could suggest a higher level of intelligence.

The performance of the participants can be interpreted as the following:

• P. S. has the highest memory span of 10 digits and the highest total words correct (15

digits). This suggests superior short-term memory capacity and cognitive processing

speed compared to other participants.

• M. K. also demonstrates a high memory span of 9 digits and performs well in terms of

total words correct (13 digits), indicating strong short-term memory ability.

11
 • G. S., H. C., and P. S. also have relatively high scores, indicating above-average short-

term memory capacity.

• M. P. P., A. M. B., S. D., P. U. B., A. K., and A. R. have lower scores, suggesting more

limited short-term memory capacity.

Based on the analysis, it appears that P. S. and M. K. possess exceptional abilities in

retaining and manipulating information in their minds. They are well-suited for tasks that

demand focus, concentration, and swift processing of data. G. S., H. C., and P. S., on the

other hand, exhibit above-average skills in temporarily manipulating information in their

minds, making them ideal for tasks that require high levels of concentration, attention, and

quick data processing. Conversely, M. P. P., A. M. B., S. D., P. U. B., A. K., and A. R. may

encounter some difficulty in recalling and manipulating information in their minds, which

might impact their performance in multitasking, problem-solving, and learning tasks.

Gender-wise trend analysis:

Females: In this dataset, females generally have memory span ranging from 6 to 7 in memory

span. This indicates an average working memory capacity. The total words correct also range

from 6 to 9. Overall, the performance seems consistent with average working memory

abilities, with no extreme high or low scores.

Males: Males in this dataset show a wider range of memory span. While some males have

memory span similar to females, there are also males with higher memory span (up to 10).

This suggests a more varied working memory capacity among males in this dataset. Some

males demonstrate exceptional working memory abilities, as indicated by their higher

memory span.

12
Comparison

The Digit Span test can be compared with a similar test called the Corsi block-tapping

test, which also measures short-term memory.

The Corsi block-tapping task, also known as the Corsiblock-tapping test (CBT),

originated from Milner's (1971) research and was later explained by her PhD student, Corsi

(1972), in his dissertation. The test is a variation of the Hebb Digit Span task (Hebb, 1961)

and aims to assess the participant's "spatial span," which is now commonly referred to as the

Corsi Span.

In the standard Corsi task, individuals are tasked with recalling the order in which a set

of rectangles illuminate. They must then select the rectangles in the same sequence as they

appeared. The Corsi span measures the maximum length of a sequence that a person can

accurately repeat. Typically, the average Corsi span is 6 blocks, with a maximum span of 9

blocks. The backward Corsi task presents an additional level of difficulty to participants. In

this task, individuals must recall and select the illuminated rectangles in reverse order.

Starting with the last illuminated rectangle, they must work their way backward. The

backward Corsi span measures the longest sequence that a person can accurately reproduce in

reverse order.

The Digit Span and Corsi block-tapping tasks are widely utilized for assessing Working

Memory (WM) (Kessels, van den Berg, Ruis & Brands, 2008). In both assessments, the

subject is required to repeat a sequence of stimuli in either the same order (forward) or the

opposite order (backward). The Digit Span involves an increasing sequence of numbers from

1 to 9 randomized to evaluate verbal WM, while the Corsi block-tapping task assesses

visuospatial WM through nine cubes on a wooden board. Both assessments are commonly

employed in neuropsychological evaluations of older adults with a suspected diagnosis of

13
pathological aging, including minor and major neurocognitive disorders. Digit Span is

commonly used in clinical settings to assess verbal working memory deficits, such as those

seen in conditions like attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), dementia, or brain

injuries. Corsi block-tapping Test is commonly used to assess visuospatial working memory

deficits, such as those seen in conditions like Alzheimer's disease, traumatic brain injury, or

developmental disorders like dyslexia.

de Paula, Malloy-Diniz & Romano-Silva (2016) conducted a study to analyse the

reliability of two working memory tasks: the Digit Span and Corsi block-tapping tasks. The

study included 25 older adults with low formal education who were referred for

neuropsychological assessment due to cognitive-functional complaints. Among them, 13 had

mild neurocognitive disorder, and 12 had major neurocognitive disorder (regardless of

etiological diagnosis). Both the Digit Span and Corsi block-tapping tasks were administered

to all participants, with two trials conducted for each span length in both forward and reverse

order. Reliability was estimated using the split-half method, with the first trials from each

span forming the first half, and the second trials forming the second half. Reliable Change

Indexes (RCIs) were calculated for all test measures. The study found that the Digit Span had

high reliability for the forward version, but low reliability for the backward version. The

Corsi block-tapping task showed moderate reliability.

A study conducted by Kessels and colleagues (2008) analysed the backward Corsi

procedure in a group of 246 healthy older adults, ranging from ages 50 to 92. They compared

the results to the Digit Span subtest of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Third Edition

(WAIS-III). Through principal component analysis, a two-factor model was revealed: the

verbal working memory factor and the spatial working memory factor. Interestingly, the Corsi

backward task was not found to be more challenging than the Corsi forward task, which

differs from the Digit Span backward task that is more difficult than the Digit Span forward

14
task. These findings suggest that the Corsi block-tapping Task backward task depends on

processing within working-memory's slave systems, while the Digit Span backward also

relies on the central executive component of working memory.

Conclusion

To summarize, the Digit Span test is a valuable tool in evaluating an individual's

working memory capacity, which is essential for tasks that demand attention and rapid data

processing. The varying performance levels among participants emphasize the unique

cognitive abilities of each individual. Additionally, comparing the results with the Corsi

block-tapping test highlights the diverse approaches to assessing working memory.

Familiarizing with these assessments can facilitate the diagnosis and treatment of cognitive

deficits in diverse populations.

15
 REFERENCES

Baddeley, A. D. (1986). Working memory. Oxford Psychology Series No. 11. Oxford:

Clarendon Press.

Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. (1974). Working memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The

Psychology of Learning and Motivation (Vol. 8, pp. 47–89). Academic Press.

Choi, H. J., Lee, D. Y., Seo, E. H., Jo, M. K., Sohn, B. K., Choe, Y. M., Byun, M. S., Kim, J.

W., Kim, S. G., Yoon, J. C., Jhoo, J. H., Kim, K. W., & Woo, J. I. (2014). A normative

study of the Digit Span in an educationally diverse elderly population. Psychiatry

investigation, 11(1), 39–43. https://doi.org/10.4306/pi.2014.11.1.39

Corsi, P. M. (1972). Human memory and the medial temporal region of the brain.

de Paula, J. J., Malloy-Diniz, L. F., & Romano-Silva, M. A. (2016). Reliability of working

memory assessment in neurocognitive disorders: a study of the Digit Span and Corsi

Block-Tapping tasks. Revista brasileira de psiquiatria (Sao Paulo, Brazil :

1999), 38(3), 262–263. https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-4446-2015-1879

Hebb, D. O. (1961). Distinctive features of learning in the higher animal. Brain mechanisms

and learning, 37, 46.

Kessels, R. P., van den Berg, E., Ruis, C., & Brands, A. M. (2008). The backward span of the

Corsi Block-Tapping Task and its association with the WAIS-III Digit

Span. Assessment, 15(4), 426–434. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191108315611

Lezak, M. D., Howieson, D. B., & Loring, D. W. (2004). Neuropsychological Assessment.

New York: Oxford University Press.

Miller, G. A., Galanter, E., & Pribram, K. H. (1960). Plans and the structure of behavior.

New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.

16
Miller, M. D. (2011). What College Teachers Should Know About Memory: A Perspective

From Cognitive Psychology.

Milner, B. (1971). Interhemispheric differences in the localization of psychological processes

in man. British Medical Bulletin, 27(3), 272–277.

https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.bmb.a070866

Muangpaisan, W., Intalapaporn, S., & Assantachai, P. (2010). Digit Span and verbal fluency

tests in patients with mild cognitive impairment and normal subjects in Thai-

community. Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand = Chotmaihet

thangphaet, 93(2), 224–230.

Ostrosky-Solís, F., & Lozano, A. (2006). Digit Span: Effect of education and culture.

International Journal of Psychology, 41(5), 333–341.

Ramirez, N. R., & Harris, R. N. (2023). 27 Examining the Relationship Between Spanish-

English Bilingualism and Digit Span Performance. Journal of the International

Neuropsychological Society, 29(s1), 440–441. doi:10.1017/S1355617723005787

Ryan, J. J., Lopez, S. J., & Paolo, A. M. (1996). Digit Span performance of persons 75-96

years of age: Base rates and associations with selected demographic variables.

Psychological Assessment, 8(3), 324–327.

Tripathi, R., Kumar, K., Bharath, S., P, M., Rawat, V. S., & Varghese, M. (2019). Indian older

adults and the Digit Span A preliminary report. Dementia & neuropsychologia, 13(1),

111–115. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-57642018dn13-010013

Wambach, D., Lamar, M., Swenson, R., Penney, D. L., Kaplan, E., & Libon, D. J. (2011).

Digit span. In Springer eBooks (pp. 844–849). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-

79948-3_1288

17