Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 1602
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Gray, S. Green, S. Alt, M. Hogan, T. Kuo, T. Brinkley, S. and Cowan, N. 2017. The structure of working memory in young children and its relation to intelligence. Journal of Memory and Language, Vol. 92, p. 183.

    Anderson, Brian A. Kronemer, Sharif I. Rilee, Jessica J. Sacktor, Ned and Marvel, Cherie L. 2016. Reward, attention, and HIV-related risk in HIV+ individuals. Neurobiology of Disease, Vol. 92, p. 157.

    Artuso, Caterina and Palladino, Paola 2016. Modulation of working memory updating: Does long-term memory lexical association matter?. Cognitive Processing, Vol. 17, Issue. 1, p. 49.

    Baars, Martine van Gog, Tamara de Bruin, Anique and Paas, Fred 2016. Effects of problem solving after worked example study on secondary school children’s monitoring accuracy. Educational Psychology, p. 1.

    Balaban, Halely and Luria, Roy 2016. Integration of Distinct Objects in Visual Working Memory Depends on Strong Objecthood Cues Even for Different-Dimension Conjunctions. Cerebral Cortex, Vol. 26, Issue. 5, p. 2093.

    Barker, Lauren A. 2016. Working Memory in the Classroom: An Inside Look at the Central Executive. Applied Neuropsychology: Child, Vol. 5, Issue. 3, p. 180.

    Basak, Chandramallika and O’Connell, Margaret A. 2016. To Switch or Not to Switch: Role of Cognitive Control in Working Memory Training in Older Adults. Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 7,

    Berggren, Nick and Eimer, Martin 2016. Does Contralateral Delay Activity Reflect Working Memory Storage or the Current Focus of Spatial Attention within Visual Working Memory?. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, p. 1.

    Bishop, Felicity L. Greville-Harris, Maddy Bostock, Jennifer Din, Amy Graham, Cynthia A. Lewith, George Liossi, Christina O’Riordan, Tim Ryves, Rachel White, Peter and Yardley, Lucy 2016. Using psychological theory and qualitative methods to develop a new evidence-based website about acupuncture for back pain. European Journal of Integrative Medicine,

    Bonfanti, M. Ducci, D. Masetti, M. Sellerino, M. and Stevenazzi, S. 2016. Using statistical analyses for improving rating methods for groundwater vulnerability in contamination maps. Environmental Earth Sciences, Vol. 75, Issue. 12,

    Bowers, Jeffrey S. Vankov, Ivan I. Damian, Markus F. and Davis, Colin J. 2016. Why do some neurons in cortex respond to information in a selective manner? Insights from artificial neural networks. Cognition, Vol. 148, p. 47.

    Brady, Timothy F. Störmer, Viola S. and Alvarez, George A. 2016. Working memory is not fixed-capacity: More active storage capacity for real-world objects than for simple stimuli. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 113, Issue. 27, p. 7459.

    Brügger, Annina Fabrikant, Sara Irina and Çöltekin, Arzu 2016. An empirical evaluation of three elevation change symbolization methods along routes in bicycle maps. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, p. 1.

    Brunner, Christian Boris Ullrich, Sebastian Jungen, Patrik and Esch, Franz-Rudolf 2016. Impact of symbolic product design on brand evaluations. Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol. 25, Issue. 3, p. 307.

    Buchsbaum, Bradley R. 2016. Neurobiology of Language.

    Campos-Magdaleno, María Díaz-Bóveda, Rosalía Juncos-Rabadán, Onésimo Facal, David and Pereiro, Arturo X. 2016. Learning and serial effects on verbal memory in mild cognitive impairment. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, Vol. 23, Issue. 4, p. 237.

    Campoy, Guillermo 2016. The special role of item–context associations in the direct-access region of working memory. Psychological Research,

    Caplan, David 2016. Neurobiology of Language.

    Cardoso-Leite, Pedro Kludt, Rachel Vignola, Gianluca Ma, Wei Ji Green, C. Shawn and Bavelier, Daphne 2016. Technology consumption and cognitive control: Contrasting action video game experience with media multitasking. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, Vol. 78, Issue. 1, p. 218.

    Cashdollar, Nathan Ruhnau, Philipp Weisz, Nathan and Hasson, Uri 2016. The Role of Working Memory in the Probabilistic Inference of Future Sensory Events. Cerebral Cortex, p. bhw138.


The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity

  • Nelson Cowan (a1)
  • DOI:
  • Published online: 01 February 2001

Miller (1956) summarized evidence that people can remember about seven chunks in short-term memory (STM) tasks. However, that number was meant more as a rough estimate and a rhetorical device than as a real capacity limit. Others have since suggested that there is a more precise capacity limit, but that it is only three to five chunks. The present target article brings together a wide variety of data on capacity limits suggesting that the smaller capacity limit is real. Capacity limits will be useful in analyses of information processing only if the boundary conditions for observing them can be carefully described. Four basic conditions in which chunks can be identified and capacity limits can accordingly be observed are: (1) when information overload limits chunks to individual stimulus items, (2) when other steps are taken specifically to block the recoding of stimulus items into larger chunks, (3) in performance discontinuities caused by the capacity limit, and (4) in various indirect effects of the capacity limit. Under these conditions, rehearsal and long-term memory cannot be used to combine stimulus items into chunks of an unknown size; nor can storage mechanisms that are not capacity-limited, such as sensory memory, allow the capacity-limited storage mechanism to be refilled during recall. A single, central capacity limit averaging about four chunks is implicated along with other, noncapacity-limited sources. The pure STM capacity limit expressed in chunks is distinguished from compound STM limits obtained when the number of separately held chunks is unclear. Reasons why pure capacity estimates fall within a narrow range are discussed and a capacity limit for the focus of attention is proposed.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Behavioral and Brain Sciences
  • ISSN: 0140-525X
  • EISSN: 1469-1825
  • URL: /core/journals/behavioral-and-brain-sciences
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *