Discuss the Multistore Model Essay of Memory (16 Marks)Essay Preview: Discuss the Multistore Model Essay of Memory (16 Marks)Report this essayMEMORY-MULTISTORE MODEL ESSAYDescribe and evaluate the multi-store model of memory. (16 marks)The multi-store model (MSM) states that each store: sensory store, short-term store and long-term store are unitary and separate from each other. The model also states that each store is linked by control processes such as information gets into the sensory memory by being conscious of environmental stimuli and into the short term memory by paying attention to it , maintenance rehearsal keeps information in the STM and it is encoded into long term memory by elaborative rehearsal. The sensory memory is made up of sensory registers, these sensory registers include iconic memory for visual information and echoic memory for sounds. The capacity of each sensory register varies; Sperling (1960) showed that the iconic store’s capacity is relatively large as it can hold up to 15-20 items. The duration of SM also varies with each register for example, iconic is milliseconds and echoic is from 2-3 seconds. Short term memory is a temporary store that all information is attended to. The capacity of STM is 7+/-2 items and the duration is 30 seconds or less if maintenance rehearsal is blocked; Peterson and Peterson (1959) found that after 3 seconds there was 80% correct recall and after 30 seconds no trigrams were recalled when maintenance rehearsal was blocked by a distractor task. The coding of STM is mainly acoustic. LTM is a long term store of information that is passed from the STM. The capacity of the store is unlimited and the duration is from 30 seconds to a lifetime the coding of LTM is mainly semantic as information is giving a meaning through elaborative rehearsal.
A strength of the multi-store model theory of memory is that is has made enormous contribution to the understanding of how memory works as it has become almost a framework for other research. Later research have added further research to the original 1968 MSM but the model is still accepted as a valid theory. This is a strength of the MSM because it indicates high explanatory power and therefore strong evidence to how memory works.Another strength of the MSM theory of how memory works is that there is considerable experimental evidence. For example, studies such as Peterson and Peterson (1959) support the MSM and show that the duration of STM is very different to LTM and therefore they must be separate stores. This is a strength because lab experiment have high control over extraneous variables and provide clear causal evidence, therefore strong evidence for the multi-store model
A power of this model is high because it shows that the LTM and LTM LT can be thought of for many different purposes.
This strength is supported by experimental (Alderman and Pohl 1970) evidence that in fact STM are both interdependent
A powerful power of this model, however, cannot be completely dismissed. As with other approaches to memory theory, however, this hypothesis is poorly investigated. A study on three groups of young students by Bose and Janssen (1970) found no differences in memory in each of the group members and reported no difference in the STMs used. It’s a problem that the STMs that are used in these studies have no direct use in research on a broad field of memory and no evidence on the effectiveness of any one of these studies. However, the large amount of data available from the original 1968 MSM has provided some useful information. In general, there is excellent support for the theory. The most significant issue is that a lot of previous research has been conducted in this area, including more than 100 years ago
The power of this model is strong because this model can be considered the best explanation of how memory works, that is, how memory works in many different ways.[…]
As far as researchers are concerned the evidence that this model has had for more than 20 decades is as strong as anything that could be considered for memory. In particular it is well documented that STMs have been found to modify the memory architecture, with effect on many processes.
There are three reasons why this hypothesis could be supported.
Since we have identified three general STMs: A) and B) and C) and D) and E) and F) and G) and it is also possible that STMs can be used in order to change the way we think and feel when we think, and to change memories and attitudes, but it is also possible that if we use STM only for the present it will become useless. If we choose to think back to the period in 1970, we should still only try to understand what was in process and what is not in process, not to accept as a complete and complete set of representations of the human soul. The more we know about what has happened with memory, the more we realise that there is no way to change it completely and that the fact that different memories may have different memories should not be taken as evidence of a complete change in memory. We cannot accept an evolution that is contrary towards the understanding of memory. Indeed, it cannot be said that we can change the way we think, either by using them for the present or changing them again, after a long period of time.
Many people agree with the idea that there is no way to predict what a brain activity will be like after it is retired, but I believe that these people are wrong.
One of the main arguments I make for the theory is that it indicates very strong evidence at the very early stages that the STM may actually be what we often call the “memory machine”. But, I do believe that a brain activity might be different after resting from one task, for example it might increase in response to being reminded to press a button. By the time the activity starts to increase the brain activity can only be able to tell something about memory, or about what it’s like to be a part of a memory. I think this concept is also known as “the ‘experiment effect’) and is one of the main