M: Lesson 6: Evaluation of the Working Memory Model

Question 1

What positive neurobiological evidence supports the working memory model?

Answer 1

Shallice and Warrington reported the case of KF, who was in a motorbike accident, had poor STM for verbal words, but not visual words. This suggests there was more than one type of STM, as the WMM suggests. It shows we have a type of STM for verbal and visual tasks.

Question 2

What positive lab experiments support the working memory model?

Answer 2

• Baddeley and hitch gave participants a dual task. they were asked to complete a reasoning task which uses the central executive, at the same time as a reading aloud task, which uses the phonological loop. Participants could do both tasks simultaneously very well, supporting the idea of separate STM compartments.
• Baddeley et al gave participants brief visual presentations of lists of words. These words were made up either of short words or long words. They were asked to recall the list immediately in the correct order. It was found that participants could recall more short words than long ones. Baddeley called this the word length affect and concluded that it supports the idea that the phonological loop can hold as many iteams as can be said in 1.5 to 2 seconds rather than being limited by 7 (=/-2) items as MSM argues.

Question 3

What general positive evaluation is there for the working memory model?

Answer 3

The WMM has practical applications. It has improved understanding of how people learn to read and so helped psychologists to assist those with Dyslexia who struggle with reading.

Question 4

What negative evaluation is there for the working memory model?

Answer 4

Several psychologists have criticised the WMM because they think the idea of a central executive is vague and untestable. Damasio presented the case of EVR who had a cerebral brain tumour removed. He had good reasoning skills which suggested his central executive was intact, but he could not make decisions, suggesting it was damaged. This case study strongly indicates that the central executive is more complicated than WMM claims.