Multi-store model of memory

How confident are you with this?

For my revision today, I chose a question from a past paper and then prepared for it, and then answered it. My teacher told me an effective way of revising is to make notes, and then say if the notes for the MSM was three pages long, cut that down to one page by using 'trigger' words, I have recently started doing this and it's a lot more effective than just writing loads and loads of notes.

The question I chose was this:

'The multi-store model has helped us to understand how memory works but may now have outlived its usefulness.'

Outline the multi-store model of memory and consider its strengths and/or limitations. (18 marks)

I don't feel that I wrote enough to get a high grade, but I'm stuck on what else I could have wrote. I basically wrote about the following:

•

What the model is, including; who proposed it and how it arose.

•

Sensory memory, short-term memory and long-term memory, including how information is encoded (e.g. acoustically or semantically), and how it can be forgotten (e.g. decay and interference), and how rehearsal is essential for transferring information from STM to LTM.

I think I wrote enough AO1 to get 5/6 marks.

For the AO2 I wrote about:

•

It's too simplistic to explain the whole memory system but has paved the way for substantial research.

•

A crucial aspect is that it distinguishes between long-term and short-term stores which suggests that LTM and STM operate differently in terms of capacity, duration and encoding and then I wrote about 'H.M' and he is the man that had severe memory impairment after having brain surgery.

•

Too simplistic and inflexible and concentrates too much on the amount of information we can process rather than how.

•

Focuses too much on the structure rather than adequately explaining the processes involved. e.g. translating M into 'em' involves the STM accessing the LTM for our stored knowledge on letter shapes and sounds etc meaning the LTM will have to go backwards in the cycle, meaning it's interactive rather than in sequence as Atkinson and Shiffrin suggested.

The above is very brief of what I wrote. I wrote about two sides of A4 and my writing is really really small, but would any of you refer to any studies/other models of memory?

Reply 1

adrenaline1989

A01

Atkinson and Schiffer (1969) proposed the model explaining memory in terms of 3 main stores. sensory memory, long term memory and short term memory. sensory memory is the 'gatekeeper' of information. Most information is processed through the STM and is rehearsed and then transferred to the LTM.

A02

support for this model comes from research into encoding, capacity and duration. the STM has a capacity of 7+ /-2 items and a duration of 18 seconds. information is ecoded acoustically in the STM and semantically in the LTM. The model has been criticised for being a passive/one way/linear model. It is not rehearsal that is important, but what we actually do with the informaton. For example it doesn't explain flashbulb memories. Other models, such as the one proposed by baddely and hitch, which claims all three don't interelate with eachother. However, his model also has criticisms in that it doesn't explain the most important part of the model (the central executive). Also Murdocks serial position curve shows stm = primary effect and LTM recency effect (oh **** other way round)

Other research that gives weight to STM/LTM comes from shallice and warrington (1978) which is about the motorcycle accident. KF's LTM was fine, but STM was poor. This is slightly peculiar as isn;t all information passed and processed through to the STM. Studies such as this should be treated with caution.

Despite its criticsms the model sets out a very easy and undertandable wayin which memory is processed and has formulated much research. Particularly Warrington/Shallice.

Hope that helps. :biggrin:

Reply 2

tricky1890

for limitations you could talk about the levels of proccessing theory which includes elaboration (Craik & I think Reisberg), distinctiveness (Eysenck) and depth of processing (Craik & Lockhart) these explain how memory gets to LTM as rehearsal is not enough. You could also talk about the fact that the multi-store model assumes stm and ltm are unitary, double dissociation shows that this is not the case, patients H.M and K.F were either stm was impaired while ltm intact or visa versa. Also how Baddeley's working memory model shows how stm is not unitary.