Working Memory and Socioeconomic Status: Breaking the Poverty Cycle

Sarah Siddiqi

Many people do not consider receiving a good quality education, having a welcoming home environment and adequate nutrition as privileges. A lack of these elements has been linked to diminished working memory (WM) in children​ ​(Baddeley 2003). Many studies have been conducted on the WM performance differences between children in low and high socioeconomic statues status (SES). There are behavioural differences that can be more easily identified, while the neurological basis for these differences are more difficult to determine.

Working memory (WM) can be defined as the maintenance and manipulation of information in short-term memory (Baddeley 2003). According to a model developed by Alan Baddeley, WM is comprised of three main components. The first component, being the Visuospatial Sketchpad, is responsible for the preservation of visual and spatial information. The second component, the Phonological Loop, is the storage of verbal/ auditory information through the process of rehearsal. The third component, the Episodic Buffer, is considered the bridge between long-term memory and the central executive. By combining all three components, the connection between sensory memory, long-term memory and perception can be established.

Studies between the two SES groups must first establish a set of criteria that can be used to distinguish between the two groups. There are many aspects associated with measuring SES. The measurement incorporates household income, education (including parental education) and social position. Those in lower SES environments allow for mechanisms that may contribute to poorer WM (Hackman & Farah 2009). These children may not receive a high quality of education, have access to the necessary medical resources and may be living in a high stress environment due to financial instability (Hackman & Farah 2009). By identifying these elements, it becomes possible to develop and implement strategies to decrease the performance gap seen in different SES groups.

By completing WM tasks while using functional neuroimaging techniques, the underlying brain regions responsible for these disparities can be identified. These studies reveal that WM depends on the medial temporal-lobe structures and the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) (Leonard et al. 2015). Follow-up studies have then focused on these areas while WM tasks are being completed. These studies have identified that children in higher SES have a thicker cortex and larger volumes of DLPFC and hippocampal area compared to those in the lower SES group (Leonard et al. 2015). As the prefrontal cortex (PFC) continues to develop into the mid-20s, there is a greater period of time for both positive and detrimental effects. This suggests the low SES environment causes delayed development in childhood, and therefore has a detrimental effect later on in life as well.

In order to reduce the performance gap seen between low and high SES children, programs that target WM have been developed. Cogmed is a training program, and was tested on children aged 8-11. The program asks children to complete several maintenance and manipulation tasks using multiple stimuli. Using eight standardized WM test before and after the training program allowed researchers to measure changes in performance (Holmes & Gathercole 2014). Future steps for this program include creating a non-digital version, such as a board game, as this may be more accessible for children in low SES environments.

By conducting research that helps to improve the lives of children in low SES environments, it allows for an opportunity to break the poverty cycle and improve the economy.

References

Baddeley, A. (2003). Working memory: looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. , 4 (10), 829–839. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1201

Hackman, D. A., Betancourt, L. M., Gallop, R., Romer, D., Brodsky, N. L., Hurt, H., & Farah, M. J. (2014). Mapping the Trajectory of Socioeconomic Disparity in Working Memory: Parental and Neighborhood Factors. Child Development, 85(4), 1433–1445. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12242

Holmes, J. & Gathercole, S. E. (2014). Taking working memory training from the laboratory into schools. Educational Psychology, 34(4), 440-450. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2013.797338

Leonard, J. A., Mackey, A. P., Finn, A. S., & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2015). Differential effects of socioeconomic status on working and procedural memory systems. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00554