MSM Flashcards
Research support for the short duration of information in iconic sensory memory
E - In studies of change blindness, participants who are shown two successive images separately by a very brief blank interval of 1/2 a second or more are generally unable to detect differences between the two images
E - provides support for the short duration of information in iconic sensory memory because the presence of even a brief blank interval leads to the visual memory of the 1st image being lost from the iconic store before it can be compared with the second visual image resulting in the inability to detect the difference between the images
Supporting evidence about the MSM’s claim about the capacity of LTM comes from the case study of Akira Haraguchi
E - Haraguchi is a retired Japanese engineer who holds the unofficial record for memorising digits of pi. In 2006, H took 16 hrs to recite 100,000 digits of pi from memory
E - H ability to recall so mischief information supports the MSM’s claim that LTM has an enormous capacity. However a limitation with this research is that it’s a single case study. H is just one person + his impression memory accomplishments may not be representative of others
L - Therefore H world record is evidence of the large capacity of LTM albeit limited evidence due its reliance on a potentially unrepresentative case study
Research evidence supporting the MSM’s claim that STM + LTM have distinct methods of coding info
E - Baddeley (1966) found participants made errors when recalling acoustically similar words during immediate recall but made more errors with semantically similar words when recalling acoustically was tested after 20 minutes
E - Findings suggest that STM + LTM encode info differently. Higher error rate for acoustically similar words in STM ( immediate recall) is because participants muddled similar sounding words which is only possible if STM relies on acoustic coding. Conversely, higher error rates for semantically similar words in LTM (recall after 20 minutes) is because participants muddled words with similar meaning suggesting LTM use semantic coding. This distinction in coding supports the MSM’s claim that STM = LTM are separate memory stores with different characteristics.
L - Therefore this study provides evidence for the MSM’s central idea that there are separate memory stores with distinct types of coding
Limitation of the MSM’s is that it provides a limited explanation of memory
E - Limitation were exposed by Craig + Watkins when they showed that elaborative rehearsals, inc linking of information to existing knowledge, is the most effective way to move information to our LTM
E - Discovery challenged the account of the MSM that information is the transfer of information from STM to LTM is an automatic process, dependent only on the the times it’s held in the LTM + therefore largely dependent on the amount of maintenance rehearsal completed. By overlooking the role of elaborative rehearsal, MSM fails to account for an important way in which we transfer information to LTM. Elaborative rehearsal plays a crucial role in memory as demonstrated by Haraguchi who memorised 100,000 digits of pi by creating elaborative stories in which the digits of pi were characters. In this way H used elaborative rehearsal to form meaningful connections between the digits > completing maintenance rehearsal on 100,000 semantically meaningless numbers.
L - Therefore the important role of elaborative rehearsal doesn’t means MSM is necessarily wrong but it does show that it fails to offer a complete explanation of memory
Case studies of patients with amnesia challenge MSM’s depiction of LTM
E - E.g patient HM showed steady improvement on ability to solve a maze problem he was shown each day, despite him having a severe form of anterograde amnesia which stopped him remembering having completed the maze problem on the previous day
E - HM’s inability to remember the previous day’s attempt at the maze = evidence his episodic memory = damage. However his improvement ability to solve the maze problem suggests his procedural memory of how to complete maze still working.
L - Therefore this study challenges the MSM’s depiction of LTM as a single unitary memory stores. If there are separate stores for episodic + procedural memory then MSM = incomplete theoretical model of memory
Research support for the MSM
E - Glanzer + Cunitz (1966) asked participants to recall words immediately or after 30 second delay during which they completed a distraction task. In immediate recall condition participants recalled more words from the beginning and end of list, however in 30 second delay condition only words at the begging of this list were easily recalled
E - Finding supports the MSM as they demonstrate the distinction between STM & LTM. The better the recall of words at the beginning of the list is explained by MSM, as the words were learnt early on, allowed more time for their transference to LTM allowing effective recall later. In contrast the strong recall of the words at the end of the list only occurred in the immediate recall condition as the recently memorised words were still available in STM but the 30 second distraction in the other condition meant they had been lost form STM due to the limited duration of info in STM
Limitation of MSM = it’s representation of LTM store = overly simplistic
E - Evidence for types of LTM = presented by Tulving in 1970’s. T argued there’s actually 3 distinct types of LTM: episodic ( memories of events); semantic (memories of fact) + procedural (memories of skill)
E - Theory that there are 3 distinct types of LTM challenges the MSM’s claim there’s a single LTM store. Although this doesn’t completely undermine the MSM, it does suggest the original theoretical model required development
