Memory

ISSN: 0965-8211 (Print) 1464-0686 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/pmem20

Gender differences in episodic memory and visual

working memory including the effects of age

Franz Pauls, Franz Petermann & Anja Christina Lepach

To cite this article: Franz Pauls, Franz Petermann & Anja Christina Lepach (2013) Gender
differences in episodic memory and visual working memory including the effects of age, Memory,
21:7, 857-874, DOI: 10.1080/09658211.2013.765892

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2013.765892

Published online: 05 Feb 2013.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 2363

Citing articles: 34 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=pmem20
Memory, 2013
Vol. 21, No. 7, 857
874, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2013.765892

Gender differences in episodic memory and visual

working memory including the effects of age

Franz Pauls, Franz Petermann, and Anja Christina Lepach

Center of Clinical Psychology and Rehabilitation, University of Bremen, Bremen,

Germany

Analysing the relationship between gender and memory, and examining the effects of age on the overall
memory-related functioning, are the ongoing goals of psychological research. The present study
examined gender and age group differences in episodic memory with respect to the type of task. In
addition, these subgroup differences were also analysed in visual working memory. A sample of 366
women and 330 men, aged between 16 and 69 years of age, participated in the current study. Results
indicate that women outperformed men on auditory memory tasks, whereas male adolescents and older
male adults showed higher level performances on visual episodic and visual working memory measures.
However, the size of gender-linked effects varied somewhat across age groups. Furthermore, results
partly support a declining performance on episodic memory and visual working memory measures with
increasing age. Although age-related losses in episodic memory could not be explained by a decreasing
verbal and visuospatial ability with age, women’s advantage in auditory episodic memory could be
explained by their advantage in verbal ability. Men’s higher level visual episodic memory performance
was found to result from their advantage in visuospatial ability. Finally, possible methodological,
biological, and cognitive explanations for the current findings are discussed.

Keywords: Age group differences; Episodic memory; Gender differences; Type of task; Visual working
memory.

The general ability to remember episodes of
events in one’s past is not only important for
learning and personality development but also
plays a decisive role in appropriate social func-
tioning. Although there are several theories of
memory coexisting in different fields of psychol-
ogy, almost all researchers agree that the concept
of memory can be subdivided into two broad
categories: long-term memory with certain sub-
systems including episodic memory (Schacter &
Tulving, 1994) and working memory. The latter
comprises executive functioning and storage com-
ponents, one of those being the visuospatial
sketchpad (Baddeley, 2000; Baddeley & Hitch,
1974). Numerous factors, among them age and
education, are assumed to affect memory perfor-
mance in certain ways. However, there is still
limited research into whether one’s sex also
influences episodic and visual working memory,
although gender differences have already been
reported for those two memory constructs (see
Herlitz & Rehnman, 2008, for an overview).
EPISODIC MEMORY AND VERBAL
ABILITY
As suggested by Tulving (2001), the ability to
remember past events directly relates to one’s
cognitive capacity for recollecting individual ex-
periences in terms of their content, location, and

Address correspondence to: Franz Pauls, University of Bremen, Center of Clinical Psychology and Rehabilitation, Grazer Str. 6,
28359 Bremen, Germany. E-mail: pauls@uni-bremen.de

# 2013 Taylor & Francis

858 PAULS, PETERMANN, LEPACH
temporal occurrence. Recent studies have found
gender differences in episodic memory tasks
favouring women, irrespective of whether verbal
or visual material had to be remembered (Bloise &
Johnson, 2007; Herlitz, Airaksinen, & Nordström,
1999; Herlitz & Yonker, 2002; Lewin, Wolgers, &
Herlitz, 2001). Herlitz, Nilsson, and Bäckman
(1997) gave an overview of previous studies
reporting gender differences favouring women in
a variety of episodic memory tasks. The size of
gender-linked effects across different episodic
memory measures ranged from d0.05 to d  magnitude of a gender-specific advantage should
0.34 depending on whether newly acquired words,
faces, or names had to be recalled or recognised
during the following retrieval. As in many similar
studies, effect size here was defined by the value
of Cohen’s d, d (Mwomen  Mmen)/SDtotal, with
a positive value of d indicating that women
performed at a higher level than men and a
negative value representing a higher level perfor-
mance of men compared to women. However,
because women typically show higher level per-
formance than men on tasks assessing verbal
ability (e.g., Sommer, Aleman, Bouma, & Kahn,
2004), especially on verbal fluency (d 0.33; see
Hyde & Linn, 1988, for an overview), it can be
assumed that gender differences in episodic
memory might, at least to some extent, depend
on the type of task. It therefore should not be
surprising if women also excel when asked to
verbally recall events from the past due to their
superior verbal ability. Herlitz et al. (1997) also
found a female advantage in tasks measuring
verbal ability, which remains through middle
and old age. However, there are some studies
showing a decreasing female advantage in long-
term memory with age (e.g., Maitland, Herlitz,
Nyberg, Bäckman, & Nilsson, 2004). It remains to
be clarified whether task-related gender differ-
ences in episodic memory are stable across
different age groups.
Since analysing specific age-linked effects on
verbal ability has been a common goal in cogni-
tive ageing research (Burke, MacKay, & James,
2000), there are many studies in this area suggest-
ing that age-related declines occur in a wide
variety of tasks measuring verbal ability in terms
of verbal fluency. This includes everyday word
retrieval (Burke, MacKay, Worthley, & Wade,
1991), producing isolated words under time pres-
sure (Schmitter-Edgecombe, Vesneski, & Jones,
2000), and producing the spelling of familiar but
irregularly spelled words (MacKay, Abrams, &
Pedroza, 1999). Following current suggestions, it
seems to be generally accepted that age-related
deficits in sensory perception, and a rapidly
decreasing ability of encoding new information
due to working memory overload, contribute to
declines in speech production (Burke et al., 2000;
MacKay & James, 2004).
Although relatively few studies have examined
gender differences in visual episodic memory, it
seems clear that the pattern of differences is
distinct from that in auditory episodic memory.
Lewin, Wolgers, and Herlitz (2001) state that the
vary as a function of the extent to which tasks rely
on visual processing versus the extent to which
verbal processing can be utilised. Astur, Ortiz,
and Sutherland (1998) as well as Postma,
Izendoorn, and De Haan (1998) found that men
outperformed women in visual episodic memory
tasks, whenever external verbal information and
verbal processing was significantly reduced. Con-
versely, in episodic memory tasks apparently
requiring visual processing, women might be
able to utilise their advantage in verbal ability if
visual information could easily be verbalised
(Voyer, Postma, Brake, & Imperator-McGinley,
2007).
WORKING MEMORY AND
VISUOSPATIAL ABILITY
In contrast to women’s verbal advantages, men
typically tend to outperform women in memory
tasks measuring visuospatial ability (e.g., de Frias,
Nilsson, & Herlitz, 2006; Weiss, Kemmler,
Deisenhammer, Fleischhacker, & Delazer, 2003).
Other studies have also found similar gender
differences in visual working memory (e.g., Duff
& Hampson, 2001; Geiger & Litwiller, 2005). As
concluded by Voyer, Voyer, and Bryden (1995),
the effect size for visuospatial ability widely
ranges from d  0.19 to d  0.56 (e.g., Heil
& Jansen-Osmann, 2008). Similar heterogeneous
effect sizes were found by Voyer et al. (1995), who
proposed to distinguish three specific categories
of visuospatial ability including mental rotation
with the largest gender difference (d  0.56; the
ability to rapidly rotate two or three dimensional
figures in mind), spatial perception with a mod-
erate gender difference (d 0.44; the ability to
determine an object’s location), and spatial visua-
lisation with the smallest gender difference (d 
0.19; the ability to manipulate complex spatial

information when several steps are required to
create the correct solution). Within their meta-
analysis, Voyer et al. (1995) found an average
effect size of d 0.37 for the overall gender
difference in visuospatial ability, indicating that
men performed at a substantially higher level
than women on most visuospatial tasks.
Although similar gender differences have also
been found in relation to age from early child-
hood to puberty (Davison & Susman, 2001;
Moore & Johnson, 2008; Quinn & Liben, 2008),
there are only a few studies supporting the
stability of gender differences in young adulthood
and old age. De Frias et al. (2006), for example,
found that gender-linked effects on visual work-
ing memory remain stable over a long period of
time. Moreover, the magnitude of gender differ-
ence seems to be almost equal in middle-aged and
old adults. Nevertheless, future research should
provide tangible proof for the existence of gender
differences in visual working memory favouring
males throughout the entire life span.
Despite studies supporting gender differences
in episodic memory and visual working memory,
several questions related to gender and age-
linked effects on both memory constructs still
need to be addressed. On the one hand, further
empirical evidence for possible subgroup differ-
ences in episodic memory is still needed. It is also
important to determine whether such differences,
if they exist, are related to the type of memory
task. Accordingly, one should consider the possi-
bility that women’s higher level performance on
most episodic memory tasks might only reflect an
advantage in verbal ability (e.g., Halpern, 1992;
Hyde & Linn, 1988) due to certain processing
modes required (Halpern & Tan, 2001). Further-
more, it is conceivable that men perform at a
higher level than women on visual episodic
memory tasks as they typically outperform wo-
men on tasks measuring visuospatial ability.
Very little is currently known about how
gender-specific advantages or disadvantages in
memory performance are related to age. There-
fore, it is of interest to examine whether gender
differences in memory are truly of equal magni-
tude across adolescence, early adulthood, and late
adulthood, or whether the size of difference
varies across these age groups. Although it still
seems to be rather difficult to directly map
neuroanatomical and neuroimaging findings
onto psychometric-driven data, research in these
fields could at least provide some indication of
varying gender-linked effects across certain age
GENDER DIFFERENCES IN EPISODIC MEMORY 859
groups. Gur et al. (1991) found a greater age-
related decline in men’s brain volume compared
to women’s brain volume, suggesting that gender
differences in auditory episodic memory tasks
could considerably increase with age. Some mag-
netic resonance imaging studies have also found
that, for at least some memory-related brain
structures, ageing effects might be more apparent
in men than women (De Bellis et al., 2001; Sowell
et al., 2007; Sullivan, Rosenbloom, Serventi, &
Pfefferbaum, 2004). Other studies, however, com-
pletely fail to find any age-by-gender interaction
(e.g., Lemaı̂tre et al., 2005; Salat et al., 2004).
Findings of those interactions in brain volume and
cortical structure are, to date, fragmentary and
inconsistent.
Furthermore, it should be noted that most of
the previous psychometric-driven investigations
reporting effect sizes for either gender or age
have mainly focused on the comparison between
isolated components of auditory episodic mem-
ory, such as word recall (Herlitz et al., 1997) or
story recall (Zelinski, Gilewski, & Schaie, 1993).
This is also true of visual episodic memory, with
object or face recognition (Rehnman & Herlitz,
2007), as well as on single aspects of visual
working memory, such as mental rotation (Silver-
man, Choi, & Peters, 2007). Utilising an instru-
ment that comprises subtests for more than one
memory construct (with coherent tasks within
each single memory scale) would allow gender
and age differences in memory performance to be
analysed on a much broader memory scale level.
Finally, the present study addresses the follow-
ing research questions: (1) Do adolescents, young
adults, and older adults show significant differ-
ences in episodic memory and visual working
memory performances due to their gender and
age? (2) If so, can these differences be generalised
across auditory and visual episodic memory
measures? (3) Do possible gender differences
remain stable in terms of magnitude and direction
across adolescents, young adults, and older adults,
or do these differences vary across age groups?
(4) Can we consider possible gender-linked
effects on memory functioning to be a result of
women’s advantage in verbal ability and men’s
advantage in visuospatial ability? (5) Are age-
related declines in verbal or visuospatial ability
responsible for possible age group differences in
episodic memory tasks including verbal or visual
material?
860 PAULS, PETERMANN, LEPACH
METHODS
The present study was carried out as part of the
German standardisation and validation project of
the Wechsler Memory Scale in its fourth edition
(WMS-IV; Petermann & Lepach, 2012; Wechsler,
2009). For the current examination of gender and
age group differences in memory, volunteers from
all over Germany were tested using the novel
German version of the WMS-IV. Sample demo-
graphics were adjusted to the 2011 German
Census results (see Petermann & Lepach, 2012,
for a detailed description). For the current
investigation, the entire dataset was analysed
before undergoing the adjustment and stratifica-
tion processes within the standardisation.
Subjects
A total of 696 healthy German adults (330 men,
366 women) between 16 and 69 years of age
participated in the present study. The sampling
procedure was conducted in order to obtain
representative age and gender distributions for
the following age groups and age subgroups as
required for later standardisation and validation
procedures:
. adolescents including 16- to 17-year-olds (31
men, 35 women), 18- to 19-year-olds (31 men,
28 women), and 20- to 24-year-olds (25 men,
29 women)
. young adults including 25- to 29-year-olds (36
men, 18 women), 30- to 34-year-olds (24 men,
18 women), and 35- to 44-year-olds (43 men,
37 women)
. older adults including 45- to 54-year-olds (43
men, 61 women), 55- to 64-year-olds (47 men,
54 women), and 65- to 69-year-olds (50 men,
86 women).
Although it was intended that the sample
would represent the German Census population
proportions, this was not totally fulfilled in the
reported sample. Age distributions of woman and
men were found not to be balanced within the age
groups mentioned above. Hence, there were
significant age differences in gender distribution
as determined by several chi-square tests of
homogeneity (pB.01). Significantly greater
proportions of female participants were found
within some age subgroups, whereas more male
participants in turn were represented in other age
subgroups. To obtain comparable age groups and
to conduct analyses of variance, data from all nine
age subgroups were pooled into three age groups:
. 179 adolescents from 16 to 24 years of age
(M 18.78 years, SD 2.32) including 87
men (M 18.72 years, SD 2.30) and 92
women (M 18.83 years, SD 2.36)
. 176 young adults between 25 and 44 years of
age (M 34.1 years, SD 6.17) including 103
men (M 33.48 years, SD 6.02) and 73
women (M 34.99 years, SD 6.32)
. 341 older adults between 45 to 69 years of
age (M 58.98, SD 7.70) including 140
men (M 58.59 years, SD 7.66) and 201
women (M 59.24 years, SD 7.74).
Within each single age group, age distributions
then turned out to be comparable for men and
women.
Materials and procedure
The WMS-IV was selected to assess multiple
domains of memory performance, including four
auditory episodic memory, four visual episodic
memory, and two visual working memory subt-
ests. The memory testing was conducted by
trained examiners and each session took about
100 minutes on average. The entire set of 10
WMS-IV subtests used for further examinations is
briefly described in the following (see Lepach &
Petermann, 2012; Petermann & Lepach, 2012;
Wechsler, 2009, for a detailed description).
Auditory episodic memory
It is suggested that performance on auditory
episodic memory represent the ability to recall
conceptually organised and semantically related
verbal information. This was therefore assessed
using the following WMS-IV subtests.
Logical memory I (LM I, immediate recall).
The LM I subtest assesses narrative memory
under a free recall condition. All examinees
were read two thematically independent stories
(Story B and Story C) and were then asked to
retell each story immediately after hearing it
using as many details as possible. Each correct
detail was awarded with one score point.

Logical memory II (LM II, delayed recall). For
assessing long-term narrative performance on LM
II, examinees were asked to retell all that they
could remember from the same two stories
presented in LM I after a delay interval of 20 to
30 minutes. The scoring procedure was the same
as for LM I.
Verbal paired associates I (VPA I, immediate
recall). VPA I was selected to measure immediate
verbal learning of associated word pairs in a
multitrial learning task. Examinees were asked
to recall novel and semantically related word
pairs. After an oral presentation of 14 word pairs,
examinees were cued with the first word of each
pair to respond with the associated second word.
One score point was given for each correctly
recalled word.
Verbal paired associates II (VPA II, delayed
recall). VPA II provides a measure of long-term
cued recall for verbally paired information. Each
examinee was asked again to recall the novel and
semantically related word pairs presented in VPA
I after a 20 to 30 minute delay. Again, each
examinee was given one score point for respond-
ing with the correct second word of a single word
pair.
Visual episodic memory
As a measure of memory for visual details and
spatial locations, performance on visual episodic
memory was assessed using four WMS-IV subt-
ests.
Designs I (DE I, immediate recall). The DE I
subtest was used to assess spatial memory for
unfamiliar visual materials. After a 10 s presenta-
tion of 44 grids with four to eight designs,
examinees were asked to select the correct de-
signs from a set of cards (including target and
distractor designs) and place them in the grid as
previously presented. Each item was scored
separately for selecting the correct design (object
recall) and for placing whichever of the designs in
the correct location (spatial perception). In addi-
tion, two bonus points were given for each correct
design in the correct location due to the correct
match of both criteria.
Designs II (DE II, delayed recall). Twenty to
thirty minutes after the entire set of 4 4 grids
had been presented in DE I, examinees were
asked to select the correct designs and to place
GENDER DIFFERENCES IN EPISODIC MEMORY 861
them in the grid in their correct location. The
scoring followed the same rules as already de-
scribed for DE II.
Visual reproduction I (VR I, immediate recall).
VR I was chosen to assess memory for geometric
nonverbal designs. After one of a total of five
different geometric designs had been presented
for 10 s, examinees were asked to immediately
recall and reproduce the previously shown design
by drawing it from memory. Each item was scored
according to standardised scoring criteria which
consider presence and accuracy of various ele-
ments within every single design.
Visual reproduction II (VR II, delayed recall).
The delayed condition in VR II assesses long-
term memory for visuospatial information. This
subtest required examinees to recall those designs
presented in VR I after a 20 to 30 minute delay.
Items were scored on the basis of the same
standardised scoring criteria as in VR I.
Visual working memory
Visual working memory subtests were origin-
ally designed to assess storage components of the
visuospatial sketchpad as well as the ability to
mentally manipulate visually presented informa-
tion (Gathercole, 2007). Further executive func-
tions, such as ignoring irrelevant information,
were also measured, particularly by the first of
the following WMS-IV subtests.
Spatial addition (SA). The SA subtest is a visual
addition task based on a modified n-back para-
digm and allows the examiner to assess visuospa-
tial storage and manipulation in working memory.
Two pages with grids showing a different pattern
of coloured dots were presented in sequence.
Examinees then had to add or subtract the
location of these dots by following a set of certain
rules, for instance, by placing a blue dot on a
blank grid in the exact location where they had
seen the blue dots on either previous grid and a
white dot in any location that blue dots had
appeared on both previous grids. One score point
was awarded if all correct dots per item were
placed in the correct location.
Symbol span (SSP). SSP was designed to assess
storage and manipulation of visual details in
working memory. It involves visual sequencing
by showing examinees a series of novel symbols
on a page. Afterwards, all examinees were shown
862 PAULS, PETERMANN, LEPACH
a different page with an array of symbols, includ-
ing some from the previous page. Examinees had
to identify which symbols were shown to them
previously by selecting the correct symbols in the
correct order. For each item, examinees were
given two points for responding with the correct
symbols in their correct order and one point for
correct symbols not in order.
Although the WMS-IV was designed to sepa-
rately measure immediate memory in terms of
short-term memory (LM I, VPA I, DE I, and
VR I) and delayed memory in terms of long-term
memory (LM II, VPA II, DE I, and VR II), factor
analyses showed no structural separability of these
two constructs in the WMS-IV (Holdnack, Zhou,
Larrabee, Millis, & Salthouse, 2011; Wechsler,
2009) and in the previous test version (Millis,
Malina, Bowers, & Ricker, 1999; Price, Tulsky,
Millis, & Weiss, 2002). This is despite the fact that
immediate and delayed recall distinctions have
already been proven to provide important infor-
mation for clinical diagnostics. However, from a
psychometric viewpoint the WMS-IV is used to
predominantly measure episodic long-term mem-
ory by the aforementioned subtests. For the
current investigation, we therefore assessed audi-
tory episodic memory capacity by LM I, LM II,
VPA I, and VPA II and visual episodic memory
capacity by DE I, DE II, VR I, and VR II to ensure
reliability and validity. In order to operationalise
visuospatial ability later on, spatial perception
performances on DE I and DE II were scored
for examinees independent of their performances
on object recall. Because merely recalling correct
objects in DE I und DE II might at least be
influenced by the general ability to encode those
objects verbally, a spatial perception subscore was
more likely to guaranteed that the visuospatial
measure remain unaffected by verbal ability.
As part of the WMS-IV testing session, all
subjects additionally underwent the Brief Cogni-
tive Status Exam (BCSE), designed to screen for
global cognitive functioning. The BCSE quickly
evaluates significant cognitive impairments by
assessing temporal orientation, incidental recall
ability, mental control, visual perceptual proces-
sing, inhibitory control, and verbal fluency (see
Lepach & Petermann, 2012; Petermann & Lepach,
2012; Wechsler, 2009, for a detailed description).
Performance on verbal fluency, particularly the
production of isolated words under time pressure
(Schmitter-Edgecombe et al., 2000) was used to
operationalise verbal ability later on. A set of
further factors that were supposed to contribute
to the overall test performance, such as visual,
hearing or motor impairments, and language
comprehension, as well as several personal factors
specific to the testing session such as physical
illness, fatigue, lacks of interest and motivation,
and attention problems were inclusively recorded
for each examinee.
RESULTS
First, it was ensured that possible gender and age
group differences in test performance were not
confounded by widely varying educational back-
grounds and cognitive statuses. Results of the
corresponding analyses were then examined in
order to evaluate possible effects of gender and
age on test performance. The potential influence
of gender and age on each memory measure was
assessed, statistically controlling for gender and
age differences in verbal fluency and spatial
perception.
Performance on verbal fluency as a component
of the BCSE was also used to indicate verbal
ability. This task required examinees to generate
as many colour names as possible within a time
limit of 30 s. Figure 1 shows gender-specific
performance on the verbal fluency task across
adolescents, young adults, and older adults.
Performance on spatial perception was scored
independently of object recall in DE I and DE II,
in order to indicate individual levels of visuospa-
tial ability. Raw scores on spatial perception were
extracted from the total raw scores achieved on
DE I and DE II and summed for both subtests,
with an obtainable maximum score of 48. Figure 2
shows performance on spatial perception across
adolescents, young adults, and older adults.
Table 1 gives an overview of the mean raw
scores and standard errors for men and women, as
well as the effect size d (Rosenthal, 1991) for
gender across the age groups. As recommended
for unequal subgroup sample sizes, standard
deviations s in Cohen’s d were estimated in due
consideration of the pooled variances (Hartung,
Knapp, & Sinha, 2008).
Total raw scores on auditory episodic memory
were computed using the sum of all unweighted
scores achieved on LM I and LM II, each with an
obtainable maximum score of 50, VPA I with an
obtainable maximum score of 56, and VPA II with
an obtainable maximum score of 14. Hence the
maximum total raw score on auditory episodic
memory that could be achieved by each examinee
 GENDER DIFFERENCES IN EPISODIC MEMORY 863

Figure 1. Means and standard errors for raw scores on verbal fluency across age groups.

was 170. Figure 3 shows mean raw scores for male
and female participants on auditory episodic
memory across the age groups.
Total raw scores on visual episodic memory
represent the sum of all scores achieved on DE I
and DE II, each with an obtainable maximum
score of 120, as well as scores achieved on VR I
and VR II, each with an obtainable maximum
score of 43. The corresponding total raw score on
visual episodic memory that could be achieved
was a maximum of 326. In Figure 4, mean raw
scores are presented separately for male and
female participants on visual episodic memory
across the age groups.
For computing total raw scores on visual
working memory, results on SA with a maximum
obtainable score of 24, and those on SSP with an
obtainable score of 50 were summed, thus result-
ing in a total raw score of a maximum of 74 points.
Corresponding mean raw scores for men and

Figure 2. Means and standard errors for raw scores on spatial perception across age groups.
864 PAULS, PETERMANN, LEPACH

TABLE 1
Means, standard errors, and effect sizes for men and women across age groups

Men Women

WMS-IV scale Age group M SE M SE Effect sizee (d)

Auditory episodic memory 16
24a 115.86 2.313 119.95 1.904 0.20

25
44b 115.09 2.083 121.81 2.266 0.33*
45
69c 103.16 1.900 108.58 1.602 0.24*
16
69d 110.23 1.244 114.08 1.141 0.17*
Visual episodic memory 16
24a 233.60 4.229 224.65 3.854 0.23*
25
44b 224.63 3.718 222.86 3.917 0.05
45
69c 195.55 3.115 189.84 2.748 0.15*
16
69d 214.66 0.272 205.17 0.143 0.23*
Visual working memory 16
24a 52.01 0.891 47.86 0.981 0.46**
25
44b 46.83 0.919 46.04 0.893 0.09
45
69c 39.69 0.815 36.87 0.715 0.28**
16
69d 45.17 0.578 41.46 0.563 0.34**

a
Adolescents, byoung adults, colder adults, dpooled age groups. e, d (Mwomen
Mmen)/SD pooled. A positive value of d indicates
that women performed at a higher level than men and a negative value indicates that men performed at a higher level than women.
*p B.05, **p B.01.

women on visual working memory across adoles-
cents, young adults, and older adults are shown in
Figure 5.
Analyses of variance
A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA)
was conducted on educational background, cog-
nitive status, verbal fluency, and spatial percep-
tion, with age group and gender as independent
variables. Multivariate tests indicated significant
effects of age group, Wilks’s l .855, F(8,
1374) 3.418, pB.01, and gender, Wilks’s l
.955, F(4, 687) 8.091, pB.01. However, the
age groupgender interaction was not signifi-
cant, confirming a multivariate main effect of
gender independent of age and a main effect of
age independent of gender. In order to evaluate
the individual effects of age group and gender on
each dependent variable, information from the
univariate F-tests within the MANOVA was
additionally examined. For educational back-
ground in terms of years of education, no main

Figure 3. Means and standard errors for raw scores on auditory episodic memory across age groups.
 GENDER DIFFERENCES IN EPISODIC MEMORY 865

Figure 4. Means and standard errors for raw scores on visual episodic memory across age groups.

effects of age group and gender as well as no
interaction between those variables were found.
This implies that there was neither a difference in
quantitative educational background among the
age groups, nor did men’s mean educational level
significantly differ from that of women. Despite
the fact that the error bars for young male and
young female adults did not overlap, the BCSE
data did not reveal significant main effects of
independent variables or an age groupgender
interaction, thus confirming comparable levels of
cognitive functioning across age groups and
gender. In contrast, results on verbal fluency
yielded main effects of age group, F(2, 690) 
7.461, p B.01, and gender, F(1, 690) 15.763,
pB.01, whereas no significant age group gender
interaction was found. Regarding spatial percep-
tion, main effects of age group, F(2, 690) 
52.970, pB.01, and gender, F(1, 690) 15.763,
pB.01, were found but, again, there was no
significant interaction between those independent
variables.

Figure 5. Means and standard errors for raw scores on visual working memory across age groups.
866 PAULS, PETERMANN, LEPACH
In addition to the MANOVA, further non-
parametric tests were conducted in order to
evaluate whether there were possible gender
differences in school graduation within each
single age group. Just as in the case of quantitative
educational background, chi-square statistics re-
vealed no differences in qualitative educational
background among the age groups (p .05).
Although post hoc analyses showed that ado-
lescents and young adults both outperformed
older adults on verbal fluency as determined by
a Scheffé and a Bonferroni test (pB.05), no
significant difference in verbal ability could be
found between adolescents and young adults.
These data are consistent with previous research,
indicating a salient female advantage in verbal
ability as well as a verbal superiority of adoles-
cents and young adults over older adults. Con-
cerning visuospatial ability, results indicated a
male advantage in spatial perception, as was
suggested. As in the case of verbal fluency, post
hoc analyses again showed that adolescents and
young adults both outperformed older adults on
spatial perception (p B.01), whereas no signifi-
cant difference in performance was found be-
tween adolescents and young adults.
A second MANOVA was conducted on the
episodic memory and visual working memory
measures, with age group and gender as indepen-
dent variables. The analysis yielded significant
multivariate effects of age group, Wilks’s l.752,
F(6, 1376) 35.171, p B.01, and gender, Wilks’s
l.938, F(3, 688) 15.066, p B.01. The age
groupgender interaction was not significant.
As determined by Scheffé and Bonferroni tests,
post hoc analyses indicated that adolescents (p B
.01) and young adults (pB.01) both outperformed
older adults on auditory episodic memory subt-
ests. Furthermore, adolescents (p B.01) and
young adults (p B.01) showed a higher level
performance than older adults on tasks measuring
visual episodic memory. In both of these cases
there was no significant difference between ado-
lescents and young adults. Similar results also
supported adolescents’ and young adults’ advan-
tage over older adults in visual working memory,
but in contrast to the other memory measures,
there was also a significant age group difference
favouring adolescents over young adults (pB.01).
Additional information obtained from several
F-tests in univariate ANOVAs was used to
evaluate gender differences for each specific age
group in both the episodic memory and the visual
working memory. Although women generally
performed at a higher level than men on auditory
episodic memory subtests, F(1, 694) 5.199, pB
.05, this female advantage was found to vary in
magnitude across the age groups. In this case,
young female adults, F(1, 174) 4.626, p B.05,
and older female adults, F(1, 339) 4.734, p B.05,
both outperformed their male counterparts,
whereas this gender difference was not significant
for adolescents (Table 1). When comparing gen-
der-specific performances on visual episodic
memory subtests regardless of age, men signifi-
cantly outperformed women, F(1, 694) 4.734,
p B.05. In fact, this male advantage still remained
for adolescents, F(1, 177) 4.453, p B.05, and
older adults, F(1, 339) 4.103, pB.05, but was
not found to be significant for young adults. Men
performed at a higher level than women on visual
working memory subtests when age groups were
pooled, F(1, 694) 9.223, pB.01. Similarly, male
adolescents outperformed female adolescents,
F(1, 177) 9.751, p B.01, and older male adults
outperformed older female adults, F(1, 339) 
6.622, p B.01. The performance of young male
adults did not significantly differ from those of
young female adults. Finally, it should be noted
that although men tended to perform at a higher
level than women on visual episodic memory and
visual working memory subtests, effect sizes were
not found to be of exactly the same magnitude
across the age groups. Particularly for young
adults, analyses of both types of visual memory
performance could not confirm any relevant gen-
der-linked effect at all. Different tests of hetero-
geneity, namely Cochran’s Q-tests, I2-statistics, and
z-value statistics contrasting gender-linked effect
sizes between adolescents, young adults, and older
adults did not indicate any significant differences
in both episodic memory measures. For visual
working memory, however, analyses of gender-
linked effects at least showed a moderate level of
heterogeneity (see Higgins & Thompson, 2002, for
an overview) between the age groups, Q(2) 
3.406, p.18; I2 41.3, with the largest hetero-
geneity of gender differences between adolescents
and young adults, z1.823, p .034.
Regression analyses (first series)
Bearing in mind that significant age group and
gender differences were found in verbal fluency, it
was deemed necessary to determine whether these
differences would also remain in episodic memory
and visual working memory after statistical
 GENDER DIFFERENCES IN EPISODIC MEMORY 867

control of verbal ability. For this purpose, a series
of hierarchical regression analyses was conducted
in order to evaluate the relative influence of age,
gender, and verbal fluency on the episodic mem-
ory and visual working memory measures.
As shown in Table 2, two regression analyses
(Block 1 and Block 2) were computed for each of
the three different models within every single
memory scale. In the first block of Model 1,
gender was entered first in the regression equa-
tions followed by verbal fluency. In the second
block, gender was entered when verbal fluency
was statistically controlled. The effects of gender
were found to be reliable for visual episodic
memory, DF(1, 694) 9.223, p B.01, and visual
working memory, DF(1, 694) 21.019, p B.01,
when entered first. Those gender-linked effects
even remained significant when verbal fluency
was statistically controlled in visual episodic
memory, DF(1, 693) 14.092, p B.01, and in
visual working memory, DF(1, 693) 31.236,
p B.01. Although there was also a gender-linked
effect on auditory episodic memory when gender
was entered first followed by verbal fluency in the
regression equation, DF(1, 694) 5.199, p B.05,
this effect was not significant as soon as verbal
fluency instead was entered first. Consequently,
results indicate that the gender-related variance in
auditory episodic memory could be sufficiently
explained by the mere presence of gender differ-
ences in verbal ability.
A difference was also found between age
groups in verbal ability. As such, age was entered
first as a predictor in the regression equation
followed by verbal fluency within the first block
of Model 2. To statistically control for verbal
ability, verbal fluency was then entered first
followed by age in the second block of the model.
As Model 2 in Table 2 shows, the effect of age was
reliable across all memory scales, irrespective of
whether age was entered first in auditory episodic
memory, DF(1, 694) 45.421, pB.01, visual epi-
sodic memory, DF(1, 694) 131.487, pB.01, and
visual working memory, DF(1, 694) 196.588,
pB.01, or right after the effect of verbal fluency
had already been taken into consideration for
auditory episodic memory, DF(1, 693) 38.810,
pB.01, visual episodic memory, DF(1, 693) 
122.215, p B.01, and visual working memory,
DF(1, 693) 184.193, p B.01. As indicated by
the first block of Model 3 in Table 2, significant
age-linked effects even remained when gender
and verbal fluency were entered first in auditory
episodic memory, DF(1, 692) 42.446, pB.01,
visual episodic memory, DF(1, 692) 113.967,
pB.01, and visual working memory, DF(1,

TABLE 2
Hierarchical regression analyses for all WMS-IV memory scales, with age, gender, and verbal fluency as predictors

Block 1 Block 2
2 2 c
WMS-IV scale Model Predictor b Cum. R DR p(DF) Predictor b Cum. R2 DR2 c
p(DF)

Auditory episodic memory 1 Gender .060 .007 .007* .023 VFa .194 .041 .041** .000
VFa .194 .045 .037** .000 Gender .060 .045 .004 .109
2 Ageb .227 .061 .061** .000 VFa .176 .041 .041** .000
VFa .176 .092 .030** .000 Ageb .227 .092 .051** .000
3 Gender .090 .007 .007* .023 Ageb .239 .061 .061** .000
VFa .162 .045 .037** .000 VFa .162 .097 .036** .000
Ageb .239 .100 .055** .000 Gender .090 .100 .003 .114
Visual episodic memory 1 Gender .140 .013 .013** .002 VFa .192 .030 .030** .000
VFa .192 .049 .036** .000 Gender .140 .049 .019** .000
2 Ageb .384 .159 .159** .000 VFa .128 .030 .030** .000
VFa .128 .175 .016** .000 Ageb .384 .175 .145** .000
3 Gender .093 .013 .013** .002 Ageb .372 .159 .159** .000
VFa .141 .049 .036** .000 VFa .141 .175 .016** .000
Ageb .372 .184 .134** .000 Gender .093 .184 .008** .008
Visual working memory 1 Gender .205 .029 .029** .000 VFa .246 .048 .048** .000
VFa .246 .089 .059** .000 Gender .205 .089 .041** .000
2 Ageb .450 .221 .221** .000 VFa .165 .048 .048** .000
VFa .165 .248 .027** .000 Ageb .450 .248 .200** .000
3 Gender .150 .029 .029** .000 Ageb .431 .221 .221** .000
VFa .187 .089 .059** .000 VFa .187 .245 .027** .000
Ageb .431 .269 .181** .000 Gender .150 .266 .022** .000

a
Verbal fluency, bpooled age groups, cchange in R2. *p B.05, **pB.01.
868 PAULS, PETERMANN, LEPACH

693) 170.946, p B.01. By additionally comput-
ing a second block of Model 3, it was confirmed
that a significant effect of gender still remained
when age and verbal fluency were simultaneously
controlled in visual episodic memory, DF(1,
692) 7.071, p B.01, and visual working memory,
DF(1, 692) 20.474, pB.01. Similar to the first
model, gender as a single predictor again could
not explain sufficiently enough variance in audi-
tory episodic memory.
Regression analyses (second series)
Since considerable age group and gender differ-
ences were also found in visuospatial ability, a
second series of hierarchical regression analyses
was conducted in order to determine whether
those subgroup differences would remain after
statistically controlling for spatial perception
(Table 3). Again, two regression analyses (Block
1 and Block 2) were computed for each of the
three different models within every single mem-
ory scale. In the first block of Model 1, gender was
entered first followed by spatial perception,
whereas in the second block, both predictors
were entered in reverse order. As in the first
series of regression analyses, the effects of gender
were found to be reliable for auditory episodic
memory, visual episodic memory, and visual
working memory when entered first. These gen-
der-linked effects still remained significant after
spatial perception was statistically controlled in
auditory episodic memory, DF(1, 693) 18.607,
p B.01, and in visual working memory, DF(1,
693) 5.975, pB.05. In contrast, a significant
effect of gender disappeared in visual episodic
memory as soon as spatial perception was con-
trolled. Current results confirm that the gender-
related variance in visual episodic memory could
be sufficiently explained by gender differences in
visuospatial ability.
As in the case of the first series of regression
analyses, the effect of age was found to be reliable
across all memory scales, irrespective of whether
age was entered first in the regression equations
or after the effect of spatial perception had been
taken into account for auditory episodic memory,
DF(1, 693) 12.223, pB.01, visual episodic mem-
ory, DF(1, 693) 24.456, p B.01, and visual work-
ing memory, DF(1, 693) 91.808, p B.01.
Moreover, significant age-linked effects still re-
mained after gender and spatial perception had
been entered first in the regression equation for
auditory episodic memory, DF(1, 692) 14.261,
p B.01, visual episodic memory, DF(1, 692) 

TABLE 3
Hierarchical regression analyses for all WMS-IV memory scales, with age, gender, and spatial perception as predictors

Block 1 Block 2
2 2 c
WMS-IV Scale Model Predictor b Cum. R DR p(DF) Predictor b Cum. R2 DR2 c
p(DF)

Auditory episodic memory 1 Gender .153 .007 .007* .023 SPa .393 .135 .135** .000
SPa .393 .157 .150** .000 Gender .153 .157 .023** .000
2 Ageb .131 .061 .061** .000 SPa .319 .135 .135** .000
SPa .319 .150 .088** .000 Ageb .131 .150 .015** .001
3 Gender .159 .007 .007* .023 Ageb .140 .061 .061** .000
SPa .343 .157 .150** .000 SPa .343 .150 .088** .000
Ageb .140 .174 .017** .000 Gender .159 .174 .025** .000
Visual episodic memory 1 Gender .028 .013 .013** .002 SPa .842 .701 .701** .000
SPa .842 .702 .689** .000 Gender .028 .702 .001 .189
2 Ageb .108 .159 .159** .000 SPa .798 .701 .701** .000
SPa .798 .711 .552** .000 Ageb .108 .711 .010** .000
3 Gender .033 .013 .013** .002 Ageb .110 .159 .159** .000
SPa .803 .702 .689** .000 SPa .803 .711 .552** .000
Ageb .110 .712 .011** .000 Gender .033 .712 .001 .111
Visual working memory 1 Gender .077 .029 .029** .000 SPa .560 .328 .328** .000
SPa .560 .334 .305** .000 Gender .077 .334 .006* .015
2 Ageb .301 .221 .221** .000 SPa .463 .328 .328** .000
SPa .463 .407 .186** .000 Ageb .301 .407 .079** .000
3 Gender .062 .029 .029** .000 Ageb .298 .221 .221** .000
SPa .454 .334 .305** .000 SPa .454 .407 .186** .000
Ageb .298 .411 .077** .000 Gender .062 .411 .004* .036

a
Spatial perception, bpooled age groups, cchange in R2. *p B.05, **p B.01.

25.271, pB.01, and visual working memory, DF(1,
692) 89.933, pB.01. As shown by the second
block of Model 3, a significant gender-linked
effect even remained after age and spatial percep-
tion were both controlled in auditory episodic
memory, DF(1, 692) 20.654, pB.01, and visual
working memory, DF(1, 692) 4.415, p B.05.
Similar to the first model, gender again could
not explain sufficiently enough variance in visual
episodic memory when the effects of age and
spatial perception had already been taken into
account.
DISCUSSION
The main research questions of the present study
addressed whether there are task-related gender
differences in episodic memory and visual work-
ing memory performances and whether these
differences remain stable across different age
groups. Although currently conducted analyses
confirmed that there were reliable differences
between men and women in all memory mea-
sures, the direction of those gender-linked effects
was found to be strongly depending on the type of
memory measure. Furthermore, these effects
slightly differed in magnitude across the age
groups.
Initially, we intended to clarify the question of
whether adolescents, young adults, and older
adults between 16 and 69 years of age show
significantly different levels of performance in
episodic memory and visual working memory
measures due to their gender. In general, our
findings strongly suggest that gender influences
performance on episodic memory subtests. Wo-
men tended to outperform men on tasks that
required remembering verbally encoded items,
whereas men showed higher level performances
on subtests measuring visuospatial processing.
When comparing specific age groups, data re-
vealed that young female and older female adults
clearly outperformed their male contemporaries
on auditory episodic memory. Although not of
significant heterogeneity, the smallest female
advantage was found for adolescents (d0.20)
and the biggest female advantage was found for
young adults (d0.33). From a methodological
perspective, slight age group differences here
could be interpreted as reflecting specific interests
or differential familiarity for different kinds of
material. This has already been discussed for
gender differences in previous studies (e.g.,
GENDER DIFFERENCES IN EPISODIC MEMORY 869
McKelvie, Standing, St. Jean, & Law, 1993;
West, Crook, & Barron, 1992). Accordingly, one
could argue that the information and themes to be
remembered in certain auditory episodic memory
tasks, such as being a responsible mother and
taking good care of the own children (in Story B
of LM I and LM II), tapped the specific interests
of young female adults to a greater extent than
those of female adolescents and older female
adults. Differences in memory performance could
be caused by the mere thematic content of
verbally presented memory tasks favouring one
age group over another. Furthermore, it is con-
ceivable that performance on such tasks could be
substantially influenced by prior semantic knowl-
edge, so that particular themes might be more
accessible to participants of a particular age or
gender. Assuming that semantic knowledge in-
creases from childhood to adulthood while access
to it decreases with age (Bjorklund, 1987), slightly
higher performances of young female adults
compared to female adolescents might thus re-
flect their advanced knowledge or an increased
utilisation of familiar semantic elements (Addis,
Wong, & Schacter, 2008; Levine, Svoboda, Hay,
Winocur, & Moscovitch, 2002). Lower-level per-
formances of older female adults in auditory
episodic memory compared to female adolescents
could on the other hand stem from a generally
decreasing retrieval ability with age.
Since various researchers have suggested pos-
sible biological explanations, women’s cognitive
performance across different age groups could
also vary as a function of hormonal balance and
menstrual cycle phase (Hausmann, Slabbekoorn,
Van Goozen, Cohen-Kettenis, & Güntürkün,
2000; McEwen, 2002; Saucier & Kimura, 1998).
It can be hypothesised that middle-aged women
in particular tend to perform at a higher level on
memory tasks, just when oestrogen levels are at
the highest level in the lifespan. Nevertheless, it
should also be noted that such hormonal effects
have not been found in most studies reporting a
comparable pattern of data (Epting & Overman,
1998; Maki, Rich, & Rosenbaum, 2002; Postma,
Winkel, Tuiten, & van Honk, 1999). In the present
study, slight but not statistically significant ad-
vantages of young female adults over the other
age groups were at best found in auditory episodic
memory but not in other memory scales.
The menopausal transition of ageing women
may also be associated with age-related declines
in cognitive performance. However, numerous
studies have failed to find a general negative
870 PAULS, PETERMANN, LEPACH
influence of the menopausal transition on cogni-
tive functioning, or have reported that those
effects completely disappear, as soon as the
effects of age and education are statistically
controlled (Fuh, Wang, Lee, Lu, & Juang, 2006;
Fuh, Wang, Lu, Juang, & Lee, 2003; Herlitz,
Thilers, & Habib, 2007; Meyer et al., 2003). Since
no definite conclusions regarding hormonal ef-
fects can be drawn yet, the role of hormones and
sex chromosomes for cognitive performance on
memory measures is rather speculative at present
but provides a worthwhile focus for future re-
search (e.g., Skuse, 2005).
Further on, a contrary gender-linked effect was
found for visual episodic memory in terms of a
men’s advantage over women. Although this was
proven to be true for adolescents and older adults,
unexpectedly, young male adults and young
female adults both performed at an equally high
level. Additionally, a similar age-related phenom-
enon was also found for men’s advantage in visual
working memory. Despite the fact that gender
differences here turned out to be the biggest in
magnitude compared to all other memory mea-
sures, a salient male advantage in visual working
memory was indeed only found for adolescents
and older adults but not for young adults. There
were no significant gender differences on the
BCSE across the age groups and no clear indica-
tion was therefore given to prove for confounding
effects. One could conclude that young female
adults generally performed almost as well as their
male counterparts in both the visual episodic and
visual working memory measure, as their cogni-
tive statuses tended to be higher than those of
young male adults. Gender differences in cogni-
tive functioning which slightly favoured women
turned out to be the biggest for young adults
compared to the other age groups. It is concei-
vable, therefore, that overall cognitive status
might compensate for the lower visual memory
capacity of young female adults compared to their
male counterparts. Generally, future studies
should provide more detailed measures of cogni-
tive functioning and health status to help deter-
mine whether elderly male and female subjects
actually differ from their younger counterparts.
In summary, the current findings support the
hypothesis that women’s advantage in auditory
episodic memory and men’s higher level perfor-
mance on tasks measuring visual episodic and
visual working memory are both rather consistent
in direction across different age groups. Several
psychosocial explanations of this, which empha-
sise the relevance of gender-specific environ-
ments, as well as biological assumptions
referring to gender differences in brain organisa-
tion and morphology, have already been discussed
elsewhere (Andreano & Cahill, 2009; Bloise &
Johnson, 2007; Herlitz & Lovén, 2009; Herlitz &
Rehnman, 2008). It is noteworthy that the ab-
sence of a significant difference in performance
between young male and female adults in tasks
measuring visual working memory is inconsistent
with previous results (e.g., de Frias et al., 2006).
This should be clarified by further investigations.
Furthermore, the question of why performance
on visual working memory measures in general
tended to continuously decline from the youngest
age group to the oldest, whereas performance on
both episodic memory measures significantly
declined only between young adults and older
adults in the current study, still remains to be
addressed. Similar to the performances on both
episodic memory measures, age-related declines
in verbal and visuospatial ability were also found
to be significant between older adults and the
other age groups, but not between adolescents
and young adults. Different rates of age-related
declines in episodic memory performances across
age groups could at least be considered as a result
of those patterns of declining performances found
in verbal fluency and spatial perception. Finally,
possible reasons and explanations for such vary-
ing patterns of age-related declines are yet to be
determined, and ideally would be addressed by
longitudinal studies in the field of developmental
psychology.
Since there remains a widespread misconcep-
tion in psychology and neuroscience that gender
differences are generally small and therefore
unimportant (e.g., Cahill, 2006), we should briefly
discuss this viewpoint. In fact, because effect sizes
in the present study ranged from d 0.17 to
0.33, indicating a female advantage, and from
d  0.05 to d 0.46, indicating a male advan-
tage, almost all of them, although mostly signifi-
cant, were small in terms of actual numbers (see
Cohen, 1988, for an overview). Nonetheless, it is
well known in neuroscience that the sizes of
gender-linked effects may range from the trivial
to the large, depending on the specific tasks being
utilised. However, it could be argued that these
gender differences are still too small to elicit future
research interest, but in any case, we believe that
they cannot a priori be considered unimportant.
Since previous research has already substantiated
a consistent pattern of gender-linked effects in

numerous memory measures, most effect sizes in
the present study are at least comparable to those
typically obtained on memory tasks with compar-
able levels of complexity (e.g., Hyde & Linn,
1988; Linn & Petersen, 1986). It should be
mentioned that there are also studies which
report even larger gender-linked effects favouring
men on visual working memory measures (e.g.,
d  0.65; Kaufman, 2007).
Considering that women performed at a higher
level than men on auditory episodic memory
measures, we also suggest that women’s higher
verbal ability might contribute to their advantage
in those memory subtests that include verbally
encoded items. Results from the regression ana-
lyses indicated that verbal ability in fact signifi-
cantly contributed to the variance across both
episodic memory and visual working memory
measures. However, statistical control of verbal
fluency virtually eliminated the variance ac-
counted for by gender in auditory episodic
memory, whereas gender differences in verbal
fluency did not significantly contribute to gender-
linked effects in any other memory scale. Wo-
men’s advantage in verbal ability was therefore
confirmed to be the main reason for gender
differences in auditory episodic memory due to
the inclusion of verbally encoded items. Further-
more, gender-linked effects remained significant
even when verbal fluency was statistically con-
trolled in visual episodic memory and visual
working memory, thus indicating a male advan-
tage in both types of visual memory measure.
Hence, the extent to which verbal ability might
enhance women’s performance on visually en-
coded items of the WMS-IV, although signifi-
cantly contributing to the variance across both
visual episodic memory and visual working mem-
ory, is proved to be too small to substantially
influence gender-linked effects in direction. Gi-
ven that age-related declines were proven to
occur in verbal ability in terms of decreasing
performances on verbal fluency with age, we also
addressed the question of whether these age
differences were responsible for the age-linked
effects in certain memory measures. Regression
analyses disclosed that the variance accounted for
by age was not eliminated by controlling statisti-
cally for verbal fluency in any memory scale. This
indicates that the age-related declines in verbal
ability could not fully explain age differences in
auditory and visual episodic memory or in visual
working memory. Moreover, age also had a
significant effect on memory, even after gender
GENDER DIFFERENCES IN EPISODIC MEMORY 871
and verbal ability both had been taken into
account.
We also addressed the question of whether a
male advantage in visual episodic and visual
working memory could be explained by men’s
advantage in visuospatial ability. As in the case of
verbal fluency, regression analyses showed that
spatial perception significantly contributed to the
variance across all memory measures. Results
presented in Table 3 indicate that gender-linked
effects were eliminated, but only in visual episo-
dic memory as soon as spatial perception was
statistically controlled. At first glance, it should be
surprising that a male advantage in spatial per-
ception could not fully explain their higher level
performance on visual working memory mea-
sures. Considering that the chosen spatial percep-
tion task required the ability to remember an
object’s correct location without demanding any
mental manipulation, however, we believe that
there are just more complex executive processes
involved in solving visual working memory tasks.
These could sufficiently explain gender-linked
effects here. In this context, it should be noted
that the entire conceptualisation of spatial per-
ception and its actual operationalisation could be
called into question. Given that the actual visuos-
patial subscore is based on a memory task (DE I
and DE II), this spatial perception measure is
suggested to be confounded with memory-related
processes due to visuospatial memory (e.g., Della
Sala, Gray, Baddeley, Allamano, & Wilson, 1999).
Nevertheless, the current visuospatial measure is
still thought to mainly indicate the ability to
determine an object’s location as spatial percep-
tion was originally defined (Voyer et al., 1995).
As the present study was carried out as part of
the German standardisation and validation pro-
ject of the WMS-IV, thus being restricted by those
subtests available, several methodological limita-
tions should also be considered. Generally, the
mere use of a single test battery like the WMS-IV
bears the risk of severely limiting the precision of
the conclusions that one is able to make about
underlying subgroup-specific effects on memory.
It should be noted that the contents of the
auditory and visual episodic memory tasks of
the WMS-IV are not directly comparable across
both memory constructs. Thus, current findings do
not allow the determination of whether it is only
the auditory versus visual aspect of episodic
memory that is exclusively responsible for the
gender-linked effects. In order to answer such a
question, the memory tasks to be used should be
872 PAULS, PETERMANN, LEPACH
as similar as possible except for the mode of
presentation. In addition, there was no opportu-
nity to examine possible gender and age-linked
effects on both working memory constructs and to
compare them to those found for auditory and
visual episodic memory in the aftermath. This is
due to the fact that the WMS-IV does not offer
any tasks measuring auditory components of
working memory.
In light of the accumulated evidence of gender
and age differences in many psychological and
neurobiological fields examining memory func-
tions, future investigations should continue sup-
porting the relevance of gender-linked effects on
memory. After all, we do not have sufficient
explanations for gender differences varying in
magnitude across certain age groups. Therefore,
future research is needed to evaluate the relative
impact of further contributing psychological, biolo-
gical, and social factors on the aforementioned
phenomenon. The opportunity of being able to
predict gender-specific performances on memory
tasks by only a few crucial factors might have some
practical implications for various areas of pedagogy,
educational psychology, and even for sales promo-
tion. Considering that a gender-specific advantage
in cognitive performance could be increased or
reversed by just using a certain type of material such
as a verbally or visually labelled one, target-
oriented processes of planning, designing, and
mediating common teaching contents could, for
example, be precisely adapted to the target group.
Last, but not least, future researchers in the
fields of psychology and neuroscience should also
challenge the widely shared view that gender-
linked effects on memory may be regarded as
negligible. This could give a deeper insight
into the basic mechanisms that essentially con-
tribute to long-term memory and working
memory functions.
Manuscript received 16 July 2012
Manuscript accepted 8 January 2013
First published online 4 February 2013
REFERENCES
Addis, D. R., Wong, A. T., & Schacter, D. L. (2008).
Age-related changes in the episodic simulation of
future events. Psychological Science, 19, 33
41.
Andreano, J., & Cahill, L. (2009). Sex inluences on the
neurobiology of learning and memory. Learning and
Memory, 16, 248
266.
Astur, R. S., Ortiz, M. L., & Sutherland, R. J. (1998). A
characterization of performance by men and women
in a virtual Morris water task: A large and reliable sex
difference. Behavioural Brain Research, 93, 185
190.
Baddeley, A. D. (2000). The episodic buffer: A
new component of working memory? Trends in
Cognitive Science, 4, 417
422.
Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. J. (1974). Working
memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of
learning and motivation: Advances in research and
theory (pp. 89
195). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Bjorklund, D. F. (1987). How age changes in knowledge
base contribute to the development of children’s
memory: An interpretive review. Developmental
Review, 7, 93
130.
Bloise, S. M., & Johnson, M. K. (2007). Memory for
emotional and neutral information: Gender
and individual differences in emotional sensitivity.
Memory, 15, 192
204.
Burke, D. M., MacKay, D. G., & James, L. E. (2000).
Theoretical approaches to language and aging. In
T. Perfect & E. Maylor (Eds.), Models of cognitive
aging (pp. 204
237). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burke, D. M., MacKay, D. G., Worthley, J. S., & Wade,
E. (1991). On the tip of the tongue: What causes
word finding failures in young and older adults?
Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 542
579.
Cahill, L. (2006). Why sex matters for neuroscience.
Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 7, 477
484.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the
behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawr-
ence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Davison, K. K., & Susman, E. J. (2001). Are hormone
levels and cognitive ability related during early
adolescence? International Journal of Behavioral
Development, 25, 416
428.
De Bellis, M. D., Keshavan, M. S., Beers, S. R., Hall, J.,
Frustaci, K., Masalehdan, A., . . . Boring, A. M.
(2001). Sex differences in brain maturation during
childhood and adolescence. Cerebral Cortex, 11,
552
557.
de Frias, C., Nilsson, L.-G., & Herlitz, A. (2006). Sex
differences in cognition are stable over a 10-year
period in adulthood and old age. Aging, Neuropsy-
chology, and Cognition, 13, 574
587.
Della Sala, S., Gray, C., Baddeley, A. D., Allamano, N.,
& Wilson, L. (1999). Pattern span: A tool for
unwelding visuo-spatial memory. Neuropsychologia,
37, 1189
1199.
Duff, S. J., & Hampson, E. (2001). A sex difference on a
novel spatial working memory task in humans. Brain
and Cognition, 47, 470
493.
Epting, L. K., & Overman, W. H. (1998). Sex-sensitive
tasks in men and women: A search of performance
fluctuations across the menstrual cycle. Behavioral
Neuroscience, 112, 1304
1317.
Fuh, J., Wang, S., Lee, S., Lu, S., & Juang, K. (2006). A
longitudinal study of cognition change during
early menopausal transition in a rural community.
Maturitas, 53, 447
453.
Fuh, J., Wang, S., Lu, S., Juang, K., & Lee, S. (2003).
Alterations in cognitive function during the meno-
pausal transition. Journal of the American Geriatric
Society, 51, 431
432.

Gathercole, S. E. (2007). The concept of working
memory. In Y. Dudai, R. Roediger, E. Tulving, &
S. Fitzpatrick (Eds.), Science of memory: Concepts
(pp. 33
51). Oxford: Elsevier.
Geiger, J. F., & Litwiller, R. M. (2005). Spatial working
memory and gender differences in science. Journal
of Instructional Psychology, 32, 49
57.
Gur, R. C., Mozley, P. D., Resnick, S. M., Gottlieb,
G. E., Kohn, M., Zimmerman, R., . . . Gur, R. E.
(1991). Gender differences in age effect on brain
atrophy measured by magnetic resonance imaging.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 88,
2845
2849.
Halpern, D. F. (1992). Sex differences in cognitive
abilities (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc.
Halpern, D. F., & Tan, U. (2001). Stereotypes and
steroids: Using a psychobiosocial model to under-
stand cognitive sex differences. Brain and Cognition,
45, 392
414.
Hartung, J., Knapp, G., & Sinha, B. K. (2008). Statistical
meta-analysis with applications. New York, NY:
Wiley.
Hausmann, M., Slabbekoorn, D., Van Goozen, S. H.
M., Cohen-Kettenis, P. T., & Güntürkün, O. (2000).
Sex hormones affect spatial abilities during the
menstrual cycle. Behavioral Neuroscience, 114,
1245
1250.
Heil, M., & Jansen-Osmann, P. (2008). Sex differences
in mental rotation with polygons of different com-
plexity: Do men utilize holistic processes whereas
women prefer piecemeal ones? Quarterly Journal of
Experimental Psychology, 61, 683
689.
Herlitz, A., Airaksinen, E., & Nordström, E. (1999).
Sex differences in episodic memory: The impact of
verbal and visuospatial ability. Neuropsychology, 13,
590
597.
Herlitz, A., & Lovén, J. (2009). Sex differences in
cognitive functions. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 41,
1081
1090.
Herlitz, A., Nilsson, L.-G., & Bäckman, L. (1997).
Gender differences in episodic memory. Memory
and Cognition, 25, 801
811.
Herlitz, A., & Rehnman, J. (2008). Sex differences in
episodic memory. Current Directions in Psychologi-
cal Science, 17, 52
56.
Herlitz, A., Thilers, P., & Habib, R. (2007). Endogenous
estrogen is not associated with cognitive perfor-
mance before, during, and following menopause.
Menopause, 14, 425
431.
Herlitz, A., & Yonker, J. E. (2002). Sex differences in
episodic memory: The influence of intelligence.
Journal of Clinical and Experimental Psychology,
24, 107
114.
Higgins, J. P. T., & Thompson, S. G. (2002). Quantifying
heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Statistics in
Medicine, 21, 1539
1558.
Holdnack, J. A., Zhou, X., Larrabee, G. J., Millis, S. R.,
& Salthouse, T. A. (2011). Confirmatory factor
analysis of the WAIS-IV/WMS-IV. Assessment, 18,
178
191.
Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. C. (1988). Gender differences
in verbal ability: A meta-analysis. Psychological
Bulletin, 104, 53
69.
GENDER DIFFERENCES IN EPISODIC MEMORY 873
Kaufman, S. B. (2007). Sex differences in mental
rotation and spatial visualization ability: Can they
be accounted for by differences in working memory
capacity? Intelligence, 35, 211
223.
Lemaı̂tre, H., Crivello, F., Grassiot, B., Alpérovitch, A.,
Tzourio, C., & Mazoyer, B. (2005). Age- and sex-
related effects on the neuroanatomy of healthy
elderly. Neuroimage, 26, 900
911.
Lepach, A. C., & Petermann, F. (2012). Memory
assessment with the German Wechsler Memory
Scale - Fourth Edition. Zeitschrift fuer Neuropsy-
chologie, 23, 123
132.
Levine, B., Svoboda, E., Hay, J. F., Winocur, G., &
Moscovitch, M. (2002). Aging and autobiographical
memory: Dissociating episodic from semantic
retrieval. Psychology and Aging, 17, 677
689.
Lewin, C., Wolgers, G., & Herlitz, A. (2001). Sex differ-
ences favoring women in verbal but not in visuospa-
tial episodic memory. Neuropsychology, 15, 165
173.
Linn, M. C., & Petersen, A. C. (1986). A meta-analysis of
gender differences in spatial ability: Implications for
mathematics and science achievement. In J. S. Hyde
& M. C. Linn (Eds.), The psychology of gender:
Advances through meta-analysis (pp. 67
101).
Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
MacKay, D. G., Abrams, L., & Pedroza, M. J. (1999).
Aging on the input versus output side: Theoretical
implications of age-linked asymmetries between
detecting versus retrieving orthographic informa-
tion. Psychology and Aging, 14, 3
17.
MacKay, D. G., & James, L. E. (2004). Sequencing,
speech production, and selective effects of aging
on phonological and morphological speech errors.
Psychology and Aging, 19, 93
107.
Maitland, S. B., Herlitz, A., Nyberg, L., Bäckman, L., &
Nilsson, L.-G. (2004). Selective sex differences in
declarative memory. Memory and Cognition, 32,
1160
1169.
Maki, P. M., Rich, J. B., & Rosenbaum, R. S. (2002).
Implicit memory varies across the menstrual cycle:
Estrogen effects in young women. Neuropsycholo-
gia, 40, 518
529.
McEwen, B. S. (2002). Estrogen actions throughout the
brain. Recent Progression in Hormone Research, 57,
357
384.
McKelvie, S. J., Standing, L., St. Jean, D., & Law, J.
(1993). Gender differences in recognition memory
for faces and cars: Evidence for the interest hypoth-
esis. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 31, 447
448.
Meyer, P. M., Powell, L. H., Wilson, R. S., Everson-
Rose, S. A., Kravitz, H. M., Luborsky, J. L., . . .
Evans, D. A. (2003). A population-based longitudi-
nal study of cognitive functioning in the menopausal
transition. Neurology, 61, 801
806.
Millis, S. R., Malina, A. C., Bowers, D. A., & Ricker, J.
H. (1999). Confirmatory factor analysis of the WMS-
III. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsy-
chology, 21, 87
93.
Moore, D. S., & Johnson, S. P. (2008). Mental rotation
in human infants: A sex difference. Psychological
Science, 19, 1063
1066.
Petermann, F., & Lepach, A. C. (2012). Wechsler
Memory Scale: Manual (4th ed., German ed.).
Frankfurt: Pearson Assessment.
874 PAULS, PETERMANN, LEPACH
Postma, A., Izendoorn, R., & De Haan, E. H. F. (1998).
Sex differences in object location memory. Brain
and Cognition, 36, 334
345.
Postma, A., Winkel, J., Tuiten, A., & van Honk, J.
(1999). Sex differences and menstrual cycle effects in
human spatial memory. Psychoneuroendocrinology,
24, 175
192.
Price, L. R., Tulsky, D., Millis, S., & Weiss, L. (2002).
Redefining the factor structure of the Wechsler
Memory Scale
III: Confirmatory factor analysis
with cross-validation. Journal of Clinical and
Experimental Neuropsychology, 24, 574
585.
Quinn, P. C., & Liben, L. S. (2008). A sex difference in
mental rotation in young infants. Psychological
Science, 19, 1067
1070.
Rehnman, J., & Herlitz, A. (2007). Women recognize
more faces than men do. Acta Psychologica, 124,
344
355.
Rosenthal, R. (1991). Meta-analytic procedures for
social research (Rev. ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Salat, D. H., Buckner, R. L., Snyder, A. Z., Greve, D.
W., Desikan, R. S., Busa, E., . . . Fischl, B. (2004).
Thinning of the cerebral cortex in aging. Cerebral
Cortex, 14, 721
730.
Saucier, D. M., & Kimura, D. (1998). Interpersonal
but not extrapersonal targeting skills is enhanced
during the midluteal phase of the menstrual cycle.
Developmental Neuropsychology, 14, 385
398.
Schacter, D. L., & Tulving, E. (1994). What are the
memory systems of 1994? In D. L. Schacter &
E. Tulving (Eds.), Memory systems 1994 (pp. 1
38).
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Schmitter-Edgecombe, M., Vesneski, M., & Jones, D.
W. R. (2000). Aging and word finding: A compar-
ison of spontaneous and constrained naming
tests. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 15,
479
493.
Silverman, I., Choi, J., & Peters, M. (2007). The hunter-
gatherer theory of sex differences in spatial abilities:
Data from 40 countries. Archives of Sexual
Behavior, 36, 261
268.
Skuse, D. H. (2005). X-linked genes and mental
functioning. Human Molecular Genetics, 14, 27
32.
Sommer, I. E., Aleman, A., Bouma, A., & Kahn, R. S.
(2004). Do women really have more bilateral
language representation than men? A meta-analysis
of functional imaging studies. Brain, 127, 1845
1852.
Sowell, E. R., Peterson, B. S., Kan, E., Woods, R. P.,
Yoshii, J., Bansal, R., . . . Toga, A. W. (2007). Sex
differences in cortical thickness mapped in 176
healthy individuals between 7 and 87 years of age.
Cerebral Cortex, 17, 1550
1560.
Sullivan, E. V., Rosenbloom, M., Serventi, K. L., &
Pfefferbaum, A. (2004). Effects of age and sex on
volumes of the thalamus, pons, and cortex. Neuro-
biology of Aging, 25, 185
192.
Tulving, E. (2001). Episodic memory and common
sense: How far apart? Philosophical Transactions
of the Royal Society of London: Biological Science,
356B, 1505
1515.
Voyer, D., Postma, A., Brake, B., & Imperator-McGinley,
J. (2007). Gender differences in object location
memory: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin
and Review, 14, 23
38.
Voyer, D., Voyer, S., & Bryden, M. P. (1995). Magni-
tude of sex differences in spatial abilities: A meta-
analysis and consideration of critical variables.
Psychological Bulletin, 117, 250
270.
Wechsler, D. (2009). Wechsler Memory Scale: Manual
(4th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Pearson Assessment.
Weiss, E. M., Kemmler, G., Deisenhammer, E. A.,
Fleischhacker, W. W., & Delazer, M. (2003). Sex
differences in cognitive functions. Personality and
Individual Differences, 35, 863
875.
West, R. L., Crook, T. H., & Barron, K. L. (1992).
Everyday memory performance across the life span:
Effects of age and noncognitive individual differ-
ences. Psychology and Aging, 7, 72
82.
Zelinski, E. M., Gilewski, M. J., & Schaie, K. W. (1993).
Individual differences in cross-sectional and 3-year
longitudinal memory performance across the adult
life span. Psychology and Aging, 8, 176
186.