Evaluation of the Multi-store model of memory?

I have two points from my psychology revision which may be able to help you out ^^ Here they are:

> The Levels of Processing theory casts doubt on the Multi-store model of memory. This is because the theory suggests that how deeply we process the information is what effects memory – not if we paid attention to the information and the amount of times the information is rehearsed. The deeper the processing, the greater recall will be. Therefore, the Multi-store model of memory can’t be a complete theory of memory.

> The MSM only focuses on the structure of memory, rather than its nature e.g. the amount of information stored may be due to the nature of the information, rather than a result of memory capacity. We are more likely to remember something that we consider meaningful. The multi-store model of memory is unable to explain why.

I do AS Psychology using the Edexcel exam board, so I'm not sure as to how relevant or how useful these points will be to you. But I hope they help out regardless!

If you've got the relevant studies, that's fine. For the MSM itself you can compare it to the working memory model because that model only focuses on STM whereas MSM focuses on both LTM and STM, meaning it's a better explanation of human memory. Talk about MRI scans which show different brain patterns in patients when they're performing different tasks for STM and LTM which supports the model as it shows that both types of memory are separate.

Hope I helped!


Posted from TSR Mobile

Thank you, you have really helped me! By the way, what is AS Psychology like? Is it interesting? I plan on studying AS Psychology.

Glad that I could help out! Also, personally I find it very interesting - its my favourite subject :P Though I'd personally say that you have to be willing to put a lot of time into learning specifics of studies, theories, key terms, etc. as there is a lot that you need to remember.

Also, just in regards to your other question - you can mention evaluation points of the relevant studies, just as long as it ultimately relates back to the theory in some way If you're unsure as to how you'd link an evaluation point with the theory, then I have an example for another theory that I could provide if you'd like.

I am willing to put a lot of time and effort into psychology

Okay, thank you. I am a little unsure as how to link an evaluation point with a theory, i would really appreciate it if you told me your example Thank you! Also, i have another question about counterbalancing (Research methods unit 1) thatsi'm unsure about, would you mind answering that question as well? Thank you!

I'm sure you'd be fine doing psychology at AS then! In my personal opinion, its not too much of a difficult subject in terms of its content - its moreso just the aspect of remembering everything aha :P

Also, here's an example point for the Interference Theory of Forgetting (supporting study):
Loftus and Palmer discovered retroactive interference when participants were shown a clip of a car crash and gave different answers to the verb used in the leading question; their memory of the event was altered. Those who were given the verb ‘collided’ estimated a lower speed than those given ‘smashed’.
However, Loftus used her own students who may have guessed the true nature of the study, meaning that there is an increased likelihood of the participants displaying demand characteristics. Therefore, it is possible that the participants did not display natural behaviour during the study. This ultimately criticises the findings of the study and its support of the theory - it is difficult to judge if similar pieces of information interfere with one another and cause a change in the original memory.

And I'd be more than happy to try and answer your question c: Feel free to ask as many questions as you'd like aha.

Oh, i understand now! Thank you! That's so freaky because i was just reading about Loftus and Palmer's study! Aha! Oh! That's another question. Is proactive interference when new information interferes with recalling old information, or is it old information interfering with new information? Or is that retroactive interference? I am confused which is which. Thanks again, it all makes perfect sense now.

And okay.. it says 'describe how an experimenter could use counterbalancing in a study where participants are timed to see how long it takes them to sort out cards into piles. A: In the presence of an audience. B: In the absence of an audience.'

Sorry if it doesn't make sense ^ It has confused me a little

Thank you! Also, if the question asked about the evaluation of the multi store model, could i talk about the evaluation of the relevant studies, or does it have to be only about the multi store model?

Proactive Interference: when old information interferes with new information.
Retroactive Interference: when new information interferes with old information.

I get a little mixed up myself sometimes between the two. The way I remember it is that the word indicates what information is being interfered with. e.g. Retro refers to 'old', so indicates that old information is being interfered with by the new information.

In regards to the question, first you'd actually have to ask yourself as to what counterbalancing is. Counterbalancing is when participants are systematically presented conditions in a different order. e.g. The participant may experience the conditions in this order: A, B and C. Another participant may experience the conditions in this order: C, B and A. You're basically just changing the order the conditions are presented in.

So in referral to the listed question, you could say something along the lines of; 'An experimenter could use counterbalancing by systematically presenting the conditions in a different order for each participant. e.g. Participant 1 could first sort the card piles in front of an audience (condition A), and then sort the card piles without the presence of an audience (condition B). Then, participant 2 could first sort the card piles without the presence of an audience (condition B), and then sort the card piles in the presence of an audience (condition A).'

You can definitely mention the evaluation of the studies but I suggest to stick to the eval of the MSM more!
Posted from TSR Mobile

Okay, thanks I agree. I'll just put the evaluation of the studies as a last resort.

Ohh, i thought it was the other way round! Thank you so much I feel so much more confident for my exam which is on Tuesday

I wasn't sure was counterbalancing was, so thank you. Is counterbalancing used to make the results more accurate or something?

A few more questions, if you don't mind answering them (Sorry! I'm probably getting on your nerves) It's about ecological validity and mundane realism. Is ecology validity about how realistic the environment is? - for example, if a study is conducted in a lab, it therefore lacks ecological validity. And is mundane realism about how realistic is the task or study. For example, Murdock's study lacks mundane realism because the participants had to learn a list of words which is unrealistic. Is that correct? Or do they mean the same thing? I'm asking this because in my mock exam, I put that Murdock's study lacked ecological validity and mundane realism as two separate weaknesses. My teacher then only gave me one mark for one of them as she said they meant the same thing. So I'm not to sure on those...

Also, what are standardised procedures? Is this where every participant follows the same procedures in an experiment? If so, why is this used in an experiment? Is it to make the results unbiased?

That's it Thank you so much for your answers.. you have really helped!

Aha no worries - I'm glad that I can help out! And no, you're not annoying me at all hehe. Good luck with your exam on Tuesday by the way!

Anyways, counterbalancing is essentially used to reduce the likelihood of order effects from occurring. But yes, it is to ultimately allow the results to be more reliable in this sense. If you don't know what order effects are, they occur in a repeated measures design and are the result of experiencing all of the listed conditions; they are split into practice and fatigue.

Practice - The participants' performance may gradually enhance as they experience each condition.
Fatigue - The participants' may become bored or tired due to experiencing all of the conditions, and this may cause a reduction in their performance.

In regards to Standardised Procedures, Ecological Validity & Mundane Realism - you've pretty much hit the nail on the head with those terms Also, standardised procedures are to increase the reliability of the study. If there were no standardised procedures, then it is likely that others who carry out the study may carry it out in a different manner; the difference in procedure may prevent the same/similar results from being produced when the study is replicated.

Haha, thanks! I'm really nervous for the exam. Although, I'm more confident on unit 1 than unit 2.

So, in a nutshell, order effects are when the participants either get better at the task or become bored with it? Which means the results will be affected?

Yay! I thought i had the definitions of those words wrong. But, is ecological validity just about the environment? Or is it about the task being preformed as well? Because in the evaluation of a study, could i put them as two separate weaknesses? Or can i only put one of them? If that makes any sense? Haha.

Repeated measures is where there is one group of participants and they take place in both conditions? And a strength of Independent groups and matched pairs is that there are no order effects and they cannot work out the aim and show demand characteristics.

Ooooh, one last thing!! (Sorry!) Practical implications. Hate them. Don't understand them at all. Well, i know it's about why something is the way it is.. is that correct? But i don't understand how to come up with them..

No problem! Mind if I ask, what exam board are you doing? Quite curious aha ~

Yep, thats basically what order effects are :P And ecological validity only refers to the environment; so essentially you should be able to list Ecological Validity and Mundane Realism as two different points.

Also yes, hit the nail on the head there with the participant designs, hehe.

In relation to practical implications, I personally haven't covered this in my psychology course but as far as I've identified; practical implications refer to what the theory/study/etc. tells us about real life - what does it imply? (e.g. The Social Identity Theory implies that prejudice occurs in society due to the mere act of being grouped).

Alrighty I'm glad you've told me that because in the exam i would have only put one of them and therefore would have lost marks.

And yay I'm not very confident with research methods and experimental designs. Especially with the advantages and disadvantages of the designs and identifying the independent and dependent variable in an experiment.

I'm doing the AQA exam board I don't think there is much difference between the exam boards.

Oh really? We haven't done much on implications as well, to be honest. Thank you, i understand it now. Although i don't know what the social identity theory is though, haha, sorry!

No worries c: I'm happy that I've managed to help out in some way at least. If you have any other questions feel free to drop me a line!

Oooh I see, I haven't looked at AQA stuff much but from what you've been asking, there doesn't seem to be too much difference in those terms aha.