Theories Of Memory Flashcards
Definition of multi-store model of the memory
permanent structural features of memory and its control processes
Structural features can be seen as hardware to built-in programs that can’t be altered
Control processes are seen as similar to programs that the programmer can write into the computer, determining the operations that the computer can perform
Control processes involve the way we encode, rehearse and retrieve memories
Sensory register
seeing, hearing, touching, tasting, smelling - sensory register has a large capacity of 3-4 items but limited duration of approximately 50 milliseconds to a few seconds before it’s lost
Duration (part of short-term memory)
information that is attended/paid attention to enetrs the short-term store for 15-30 seconds, then assumed to decay completely unless rehearsed
Capacity (part of short-term memory)
STM can hold between 5-9 items (Miller’s magic no. 7)
new information that is added makes older information decay quickly
Encoding (part of short-term memory)
primarily acoustic (auditory or verbal) in this store) - nature of information held in STM does not depend on its input form (e.g. images)
Retrieval (part of short-term-memory)
largely based on rapid sequential scan of the stored information. Important in maintaining information in the short-term store, increasing strength of memory trace and building up memory trace in the long-term store
Encoding (part of long-term memory)
can depend on the rehearsal process or some form of association between the new and pre-existing knowledge stored there. Encodes semantically
Duration (part of long-term memory)
potentially a lifetime
Capacity (part of long-term memory)
potentially infinite
What does the sensory store/register act as?
a buffer for sensory input from the five senses using modality specific encoding for this information - info is in several stores for each of our 5 senses
Supporting evidence for multi-store model of memory
Clive Wearing suffered amnesia, so couldn’t remember or storenew memories, but could hold information temporarily in his consciousness. This shows long-term store was damaged but his short-term store was in tact, so must be independent from one another
Glanzer & Cunitz conducted study to see if position of a word in a list affected its recall, finding ppts recalled more words from beginning of a list (primacy) and the edn (recency) but few from the middle. Words at beginning of list had time to be rehearsed and those at end were in short-term slots
Conflicting evidence of multi-store memory
study of brain-damaged patients like Clive Wearing highlight overly simplistic view of long-term memory. Clive couldn’t recall past events but could remember how to play piano. Shows LTM isn’t a single unitary store but perhaps we have different long-term stores for procedural memeory and practised skills/abilities, and other long-term stores for facts
Other explanations for multi-store model of memory
this model over-emphasises the role of rehearsal. don’t have to rehearse info for it to pass through long-term memory - Craik & Lockhart (1972) offer alternative explanation for transfer of info from Short-term to long-term store as the describe different levels of processing (structural, phonemic, semantic) suggesting that greater depth of processing means more durable the memory trace formed
CW can’t make nw LTM but able to play piano, suggests there’s more to LTM than one store, therefore to simple, not taking into account all aspects of LTM, therefore highlyreductionist
-Usefulness of Multi-store model of memory
understanding of human behaviour, as is a valuable framework in understanding human memory and heuristics that has stimulated huge wealth over memory research. Early model emphasised rehearsal led to better, more precise theories being proposed (craik & Lockhart’s level of processing; Baddeley’s working memory model)
Testability of multi-store model of memory
subjects of case studies are unique (brain injury too), so can’t generalise distincton of stores to all people. We can’t be sure all people have separate STM and LTM stores, so research into MSM lacks external validity as can’t be applied to everyone
much supporting research conducted in lab with unrealistic tasks (learning & recalling an unrelated list of words which lack ecological validity 0 - not how we use memory day-to-day, so might be that we don’t use separate stores in day-to-day life. Can’t apply findings to real life situations
Central Executive
drives whole system and allocates data to subsystems (VSS and PL). Deals with cogntive tasks such as mental arithmetic and problem-solving. Monitors overall systems rather than acting as info storage system
Phonological Loop
deals with spoken and written material, consists of 2 parts (can be used to remember phone no.)
Phonological Store
inner ear, linked to speech perception, holding info in speech form for 1-2 seconds
Articulatory Control Process
Inner voice, linked to speech production, used to rehearse and store verbal info from phonological store
VSSP (inner eye)
stores and processes info in a visual or spatial form, used for navigation, has visual cache which stores visual data (images)
VSSP (inner scribe)
records arangements of objects in visual field, allows rehearsal of visual/spatial information, to maintain in the visual cache
Episodic Buffer
integrating and manipulating material; limited capacity, depends heavily on executive processing. Binds together info from different sources into chunks or episodes - recall info from LTM and integrate into STM when working memory requires it
Supporting evidence of WMM
Patient KF had STM impairment following motorbike accident, had a digit span of one, suggesting gross impairment of phonological store, but visual memory was intact - shows there must be a separate visual and auditory short-term memory
Paulesu et al (1993) evidence of differnt subcomponents in the brain, demonstarted diffferent regions were activated when doing tasks that employed phonological store and articulatory control system. PET scan showed BROCA’s area activated when asked to remeber words & supramarginal gyrus was activated when the phonological store was used - provides evidence for phonological loop and its separate subcomponents
Other explanations for WMM
only explains memory in short-term, so despite addressing complexity of store, it isn’t a complete explanation of how memory works and didn’t originally explain the transference to LTM, so too simple, therefore reductionist