Strengths and weakness of the multi store model

Strengths and weakness of the multi store model Strengths

Neuropsychology evidence • HM show STM and LTM can function normally. Transfer and retrieval from LTM is impossible. Milner • KF had intact LTM but damged Hippocampus which grossily effected by STM • Brain scanning also show two centres of STM and LTM

Lots of research Evidence • Glanzer and Cunitz shows how STM and LTM function differently. • It also supports MSM in showing how rehearsal moves information from STM to LTM

Laboratory Evidence • Duration Peterson and Peterson STM limited to a few seconds (think of graph) • LTM can last a lifetime (Bahrick) • Capacity = Miller • Acoustic Coding (STM) = Conrad and semantic preferred form in LTM (Baddeley)

weaknesses • KF new information into LTM even when his STM was not working properly (so no rehearsal) • Shocking events go straight into LTM • Techniques for memory that do not rely on rehearsal.

Research Interpretation • KF and HM can support and cast doubt on model. Extract: • Miller only a certain amount of space in STM but Baddeley thought of STM as a period of time

Is it too simple • Is it linear • Is it just acoustic • Is it an over simplification of memory.

Essay • Describe and Evaluate the MSM.

KF In contrast K. F. could recall a sequence of four visually presented digits. When he made errors with visually presented letters, these errors tended to be based on visual confusions rather than acoustic confusions. As I mentioned earlier, most normal subjects tend to produce acoustic confusions with visually presented, verbal material. This suggests that normal subjects usually translate the visually presented words, letters, or digits into a phonologically based code for retention in a phonologically based store. It appeared, then, that K. F. attempted to retain information using relatively intact visual short-term storage functions while his phonologically based, verbal short-term storage system was severely impaired.