The Multi Store Model Flashcards
Who proposed the MSM
-Atkinson and Shriffin (1968)
What is the MSM often referred to as
he modal model as it was widely used for a long time
How does the MSM explain memory
-A linear process involving three distinct stores: the sensory memory, STM and LTM.
-information flows from one store to the next in a sequential manner, depending on the processes of attention rehearsal and retrieval
3 components of the MSM
-Sensory memory
-STM
-LTM
Function of the sensory register
-Briefly stores information from our senses (e.g sights, sounds). Each sense has its own sensory register.
What are the different types of sensory register
-Iconic memory
-Echoic memory
-Haptic memory
What is iconic memory
-visual information
What is echoic memory
-Auditory information
What is haptic memory
-tactile information (what we feel)
Capacity of the sensory register
-Very large. It briefly holds all sensory information that we encounter
Duration of the sensory register
-Very brief, lasting only milliseconds if information is not attended to.
How is information coded in the sensory register
-Depends on which sense is involved. E.g if the information is visual, it is coded into iconic store
Where does information from the sensory register transfer to if attended to
STM
What will happen if information is not attended to in the sensory register
Rapidly decay
duration of the STM
-Limited to around 18-30 seconds unless rehearsal is used to keep it active
Capacity of the STM
7 + or _ 2 items (miller)
How can the capacity of the STM be increased
By chunking information
What type of coding is used in the STM
Information is coded acoustically. This means it store information based on sound
How is information in the STM transferred to the LTM
-Maintenance rehearsal is used to keep the memory active or transfer it to the LTM
Capacity of the LTM
Potentially unlimited
Duration of the LTM
-Potentially life long
Type of coding used by LTM
-Primarily semantic, meaning it stores information based on meaning.
What are the 3 key processes of the MSM
-Attention
-Maintainence rehearsal
-Retrieval
What happens during the process of attention
-If a person focuses on a sensory input and attends to it, the information is transferred form the sensory register to the STM
what happens during the process of maintenance rehearsal
-When information in the SM is repeated, it is strengthened, increasing the likelihood that it will be transferred to LTM
What happens during the process of retrieval
-Information stored in the LTM can be brought back to the STM when needed for immediate use.
Sperling (1960)- capacity and duration of the sensory memory study
-AIM: to identify the capacity and duration of the sensory memory
-METHOD: participants saw a grid of digits and letters for 50 milliseconds. hey were then asked to wither recall the entire grid or after a specific tone, recall a particular row.
-RESULT: participants had a higher recall accuracy for the indicated row, suggesting SM can hold all information for a brief time but can decay rapidly if not attended to
-CONCLUSION: SM has a large capacity but limited duration
Jacob’s (1887)- Digit span technique study for the capacity of STM
-AIM: to measure the capacity of STM for letters and numbers
-METHOD: participants were read a sequence of numbers or letters gradually increasing until they could no longer recall the sequence in the correct order.
-RESULT: the mean span for digits was 9.3 items, while for letters it was 7.3 items
-CONCLUSION: STM has a limited capacity
Strength of criticism of Jacob’s digit span study for STM capacity
-Lacks validity - Early research lacked adequate controls
-Conformed by other research E.g Miller, conforming its reliability
Miller (1956)- STM capacity study
-AIM: to investigate capacity of STM
-METHOD: observations of everyday memory patterns, including studies on digit span and chunking
-RESULTS: STM can hold around 7+ or - 2 chunks of information. The capacity can be increased by chunking information
-CONCLUSION: STM has limited capacity but can hold much more using the method if chunking
Strength and criticism of MIller’s research on STM capacity
-Supported by earlier research. E.G Jacob’s
-Overestimation of its capacity- Cowan: closer to 4 chunks of information
-Real world application. Chunking is a widely used strategy for memory.E.G phone number recall
Peterson and Peterson (1959) study on duration of STM
-AIM: to investigate the duration of STM when rehearsal is prevented
-MEHOD: participants presented with trigrams (e.g JFW) and asked to count backwards to prevent rehearsal, with recall, intervals from 3 to 18 seocnds.
-RESULTS: the accuracy of recall dropped significantly after a few seconds, with only 10% recall after 18 seconds
-CONCLUSION: STM duration is vey limited (around 18-30 seconds) when rehearsal is prevented, supporting the MSM’s claim of discrete memory components
Strength and criticism of Peterson and Peterson
-Use of laboratory setting- control EV’s= high internal validity
-Lack of ecological validity due to use of meaningless trigrams which may not accurately reflect memory processes in real world contexts
-Demand characteristics- the sample consisted of psychology students so may have been able to guess the purpose of the study or had previous knowledge of memory studies. GENERALISABLE??
Bahrick et al (1975) study on LTM duration
-AIM: to investigate duration of LTM using real life memories
-METHOD: 392 American graduates aged 17-74 were tested on their recall of high school classmates names from yearbook photos through recognition and free recall tasks
-RESULTS: participants achieved 90% accuracy for recognition after 15 years and 70% after 48 years, although accuracy for free recall was lower.
-CONCLUSION: LTM has a potentially lifelong duration especially for meaningful info
Strength and criticism of Bahrick et al
-High ecological validity due to use of year book photos- reflects memory in real life contexts where memory tends to be more meaningful. Can be applied to real life contexts.
-Sample consisted of only American graduates- lacks generalisability. People form different education system backgrounds may perform differently on similar tasks
-Potential confounding variables- some may have kept in close contact with class mates- memory is reinforced. Affects trie interpretation for duration of LTM
Baddeley et al (1968) study on LTM and STM coding
-AIM: to investigate how information is coded in the STM and LTM
-METHOD: participants were presented with 4 lists of words: acoustically similar and dissimilar, and semantically similar and dissimilar. They were then asked to recall them, immediate and delayed recall was tested
-RESULTS: STM recall was more challenging with acoustically similar words. LTM recall was harder for semantically similar words
-CONCLUSION: STM primarily uses acoustic coding while LTM primarily uses semantic coding
Strength and limitation of Baddeley
-Controlled word lists- clear evidence for different coding methods (support MSM). More reliable
-Use of word lists may lack ecological validity- does not reflect ,Emory processes in real life contexts where info is usually more meaningful
-Ignores olfactory and visual coding- limits understanding of the complexity and flexibility of memory
What support is there from case studies from the MSM
-HM (Scoville and Milner)
-Clive Wearing
How does HM’s case study support the MSM
-HM had severe epilepsy and underwent surgery to remove his hippocampus. Post surgery, he was unable to form new long term memories but retained memories from before the operation, demonstrating that his STM was functional, but information could not be transferred to the LTM.
-This supports the MSMs claim that STM and LTM are separate stores as HM could not transfer information between them
What is the problem with using case studies for evidence
-Case studies often lack generalisability. (E.g HM had unique injuries as his memory deficits were caused by surgery, so does not reflect typical memory processes)
How does Clive Wearing’s case study support the MSM
-Clive Wearing contracted a virus that caused amnesia. He could only remember information for 20-30 seconds but could recall events from before his illness, such as his wife’s name
-Like HM this demonstrates the separation of STM and LTM, as information couldn’t be transferred between stores
What is the problem with Clive Wearings study in supporting the MSM
-His ability to recall procedural memories (e.g playing the piano) challenges the MSM, suggesting that LTM is not a unitary store
Evidence from brain scans by Beardsley in supporting the MSM
-Brain scans show that the prefrontal cortex is active during STM tasks but not during LTM
Evidence from brain scans by Squire in supporting MSM
-The hippocampus is active when LTM is engaged
Strength of brain scanning evidence for the MSM
-These findings provide biological evidence supporting the MSM’s claim that STM and LTM are distinct systems
Limitation of brain scanning evidence for the MSM
-Brain activity does not explain how information is transferred between stores or why done memories are forgotten despite rehearsal
Criticism of the MSM
-Evidence by Baddeley and Hitch suggests that LTM and STM aren’t as unitary as the model proposes. They proposed the WMM, which shows that the STM is divided into multiple components (PL, VS)
-Furthermore, Tulving (1985) proposed that the LTM consists of separate stores: episodic memory, semantic, and procedural
-These findings challenge the MSM’s simplicity, suggesting it does not fully explain the complexity of memory
