Memory - The Working Memory Model Flashcards
4 marker WMM
- A strength of the working memory model is the clinical evidence support through a case study
- For example, Shallice and Warrington conducted a case study of KF who had suffered brain damage, severely impairing his STM. KF would forget sounds but could recall letters and digits, suggesting his phonological loop had been damaged but the rest of his STM was intact
- This case study is evidence that STM is not a unitary store, as argued by the WWM
- However, it can be argued that its unclear whether KF had other cognitive impairments apart from the damage to his phonological loop that could have affected his performance on memory, specifically trauma from his motorcycle accident that caused his injury, reducing the reliability of KF’s case study
- Despite this, the findings strongly support the existence of a separate visual and acoustic memory stores
- Thus increasing the validity of the working memory model
AO1
- Working Memory Model (WMM) – a representation of short-term memory (STM). It suggests STM is a dynamic processor of different types of information using subunits co-ordinated by a central-decision making system
- Central executive (CE) – The component of WMM that co-ordinates the activities if the three subsystems in memory. It also allows processing resources to those activities
- Phonological loop (PL) – the component of the WMM that processes information in terms of sound. This includes both written and spoken material. It’s divided into the phonological store and the articulatory process
- Visuo-spatial sketchpad (VSS) – The component of the WMM that processes visual and spatial information in a mental space often called our ‘inner eye’
- Episodic Buffer (EB) – The component of the WMM that brings together material form the other subsystems into a single memory rather than separate strands. It also provides a bridge between working memory and long-term memory
AO3
- A strength of the working memory model is the clinical evidence support through a case study
- For example, Shallice and Warrington conducted a case study of KF who had suffered brain damage, severely impairing his STM. KF would forget sounds but could recall letters and digits, suggesting his phonological loop had been damaged but the rest of his STM was intact
- This case study is evidence that STM is not a unitary store, as argued by the WWM
- However, it can be argued that its unclear whether KF had other cognitive impairments apart from the damage to his phonological loop that could have affected his performance on memory, specifically trauma from his motorcycle accident that caused his injury, reducing the reliability of KF’s case study
- Despite this, the findings strongly support the existence of a separate visual and acoustic memory stores
- Thus increasing the validity of the working memory model
- Another strength of the WMM is the research support
- For example, Baddley et al were able to highlight the different slave systems of the WMM utilising dual task performance. He found that when participants carried out a visual and verbal task at the same time (dual task), their performance on each was similar to when they carried out the tasks separately.
- This is a strength as it shows that we are able to process auditory and visual information at the same time as they go into different slave systems as highlighted by the working memory model
- However, we cannot process two visual tasks at the same time or two verbal tasks at the same time as both visual or both verbal tasks are competing for the same slave system, therefore reducing the usefulness of the WMM when doing two of the same type of tasks.
- Despite that, this shows that there must be a separate slave system that processes visual input and one for verbal processing
- Thus increasing the validity of the working memory model
- A weakness of the working memory model is the lack of detail surrounding the central executive
- For example, Baddley has been criticised for his lack of explanation into the role of this component, arguing that it lacks detail and its not well understood from the account of the model
- This is a weakness of the WMM as it highlights how further research is needed into this component to increase our knowledge of STM
- However, the fact that this was developed later on suggests that there must be value to it because its been added on, because the central executive has a limited capacity and its modality free, you can’t test capacity
- Despite this, due to the lack of clarity behind the CE, it challenges the integrity of the WMM, therefore reducing its credibility.
- Thus decreasing the validity of the working memory model
WMM
After the development of the multi-store model, research questioned the existence of a single STM
store. Because we actively process information in STM, it is far too complex to suggest that STM is just
a temporary store for transferring information into LTM. Baddeley and Hitch (1974) devised the
‘working memory model’ in an attempt to demonstrate what is happening to information when we are
consciously thinking about it. Cohen described the WMM as the explanation of conscious thought
happening ‘now’
structure of WMM
central executive
goes to
visuospatial sketchpad , episodic buffer, phonological loop bi-directional
all three have bidirectional arrows pointing to LTM
phonological loop - auditory control system to phonological store bi-directional
LTM IS ACTUALLY NOT PART OF THE WMM BUT ITS IN THE STRUCTURE
central executive
The function of the central executive is to direct attention to particular tasks, determining how the
brain’s resources are allocated to tasks. The CE attends and monitors incoming information from the
senses or LTM and this information is then sent to the other slave systems for processing and
temporary storage. The CE has very little capacity so it cannot attend to too many things at once, and it
has no capacity for storing data.
the phonological loop
The phonological loop has a limited capacity and its function is to store speech-based sounds for brief
periods. It has two components:
- The phonological store
Allows acoustically coded items to be stored for brief periods (someone talking, a melody etc.)
Hence its nickname - The Inner ear. - The articulatory control process
Allows sub vocal repetitions of items in phonological store. This is similar to maintenance rehearsal. Hence it’s nickname - the inner voice.
visuo-spatial sketchpad
The VSS processes and stores mental images in terms of what they look like and their place in the
visual field. It is independent from the phonological loop, and has a limited capacity.
It is used when people are planning a spatial task, like moving from one room to the next, reaching for
their cup of coffee etc. Hence it’s nickname – the inner eye.
episodic buffer
Added in 2000, the episodic buffer is a general store that allows both sound and visual information to
be bound together.
It integrates information from the other systems and also offers a sense of time sequencing.
It records events (episodes) that are happening and sends information to LTM.
Like all the systems in working memory, it has a limited capacity.
evaluation of WMM
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE - SEPERATE EXISTENCE OF STORES
P- There is evidence to support the limited capacity and separate nature of the slave
systems, demonstrated by research into dual-task performance.
E- Gathercole and Baddeley (1993) found that participants had more difficulty doing
two visual tasks (simultaneously tracking a moving point of light and describing the
letter F) than doing both a visual and verbal task at the same time.
E-This increased difficulty is because both visual tasks compete for the same slave
system, whereas when doing a verbal and visual task simultaneously, there is no
competition.
L- The evidence indicates that the VSSP and the PL are separate slave systems but also
demonstrates the limited capacity of the VSSP.
LACK OF CLARITY OVER CE
- The WMM can be criticised because there is a lack of clarity over the central
executive and the exact role it plays in the model.
E- Baddeley acknowledges this flaw in the model when he stated in 2003 “The central
executive is the most important but the least understood component of working
memory.”
E- Evidence to support this argument was conducted by Eslinger and Demasio (1985. .
They reported on the case study of EVR who had a cerebral tumour removed. He
performed well on tests of reasoning, which suggests that his central executive was
intact; however, he had poor decision-making skills, which suggests that his central
executive was not wholly intact.
L- This suggests that the original concept of the central executive needs to be more
clearly specified than just being simply ‘attention’ and that perhaps it may consist of
separate components.
COMPARISON TO MSM
o
MSM
P- The WMM compares favourably to the MSM. It attempts to explain how memory
functions, as opposed to simply describing the structure of memory.
E- As a result of this, it has led to a greater understanding of cognitive dysfunction e.g.
ADHD and dyslexia which are thought to be linked with impairments of working memory.
E- Research has led to a number of methods being developed to help children with
ADHD focus on tasks e.g. use brief and simple instructions so they don’t forget what
they are doing (limited capacity of phonological loop).
L- The development of the working memory model has many tangible benefits that
clearly demonstrate the value of the model. In comparison, the practical applications of
the MSM are limited.
