Is there any reason why chunking the digit span test would not help, and what is the average score without chunking? By chunking I mean any rehearsal besides saying the numbers one time as they appear.
I asked a similar question already:
Just intrigued why chunking might not work as well (and it's trivial that it won't always work as well), or not at all.
As far as I know the effectiveness of chunking depends on (1) test speed and (2) amount of practice.
At low speed simple techniquest benefit almost everyone a little, even with virtually no practice. Quoting from Dempster and Zinkgraf
Recently, in fact, evidence has been found that questions the validity of the assumption that chunking plays a role in digit-span variance. In one experiment, Lyon (1977) presented 12-item digit sequences to adult subjects for whom conventional digit-span estimates were available, and instructed them to think of each successive group of three digits as a three-digit number. The important result was that subjects with high spans (average = 8.3) benefited just as much from the chunking instructions as those with low spans (average = 6.1). Thus, prompting all subjects to impose a common structure on the lists did not produce the convergence of the two groups that would be expected if chunking was the source of differences between subjects in the high- and low-span groups.
On the other hand
However, it does seem plausible that the temporal characteristics of the digit-span task (rapid presentation rate and single trial) simply allow little opportunity for chunking, unless the individual is exceptionally adept at creating chunks (Hunt & Love, 1972, pp. 248-250), or has received an extended period of practice (Ericsson, Chase, & Faloon, 1980; Gates & Taylor, 1925; Martin & Fernberger, 1929). For such an individual, chunking can be a highly successful strategy.
The "extended practice" mentioned there involves associative techniques not merely chunking.
