Evaluation of MSM Flashcards
(15 cards)
What CAN Clive Wearing remember
- Still play the piano
- Conduct a choir
- Remember the names of food
- Remember his wife Deborah
What can Clive Wearing NOT do
- Remember he has received a musical education
- Distinguish between the tastes of foods (e.g. link the food chicken with the taste)
- Form new long term memories (his memory lasts between 7 – 30 seconds)
- Remember the names of his children from his first marriage although he knows he has children
- Remember he has just played the piano or conducted a choir once the music stops
How does the case of Clive Wearing support the MSM
Supports the idea that the STM and LTM are separate
How does the case of Clive Wearing NOT support the MSM
Doesn’t support the idea that stores are unitary
Evaluate supports of Clive Wearing as a strength of the MSM
P: Supported by the real life case study of Clive Wearing.
E: Clive Wearing’s memory ‘restarted’ once the time span of his STM elapsed (30 seconds) which shows that his STM is working. However, his LTM is damaged because he could not recall some long term memories e.g. names of his children.
E: Findings support that the model is a valid explanation of memory because they suggest that STM and LTM are separate stores as the MSM claims and one store can be damaged (LTM) whilst the other store remains intact (STM).
Evaluate the case of Clive Wearing as a limitation of the MSM
P: Not fully supported by the real life case study of Clive Wearing.
E: Clive Wearing has some long term memories but not others e.g. he cannot recall having received a musical education (episodic memory) but can still play the piano (procedural memory).
E: These findings do not support that the model is a valid explanation of memory because they suggest that LTM is not a unitary store like the MSM claims.
What was the aim of Glanzer & Cunitz study
o investigate if recall of words is affected by the order that they are presented.
What was the method of Glanzer & Cunitz study
Participants heard a long list of words and then had to recall them in any order they wished.
What were the results of Glanzer & Cunitz study
Participants’ recall was best for the first items on the list (primacy effect) and the last items on the list (recency effect) and they tended to recall the last few items first
What was the conclusion of Glanzer & Cunitz study
Primary effect occurs because participants were able to rehearse the first items on the list and store them in LTM and the recency effect occurs because the last few items on the list are still fresh in STM.
This study therefore suggests that there are two separate stores in memory.
What a strength of the MSM
Supported by research (G&C)
What are limitations of the MSM
Contradicted by KF
Contradicted by WMM
Evaluate supported by research as a strength of the MSM
P: Research supports that STM and LTM are separate stores.
E: Glanzer & Cunitz (1966) asked participants to remember a list of words. They found that when participants were asked to recall the words, they tended to recall the words from the beginning and the end of the list the most.
The words at the start are linked to LTM (primacy effect) and the words at the end of the list are linked to STM (recency effect).
E: Strength because it demonstrates that STM and LTM are separate stores as the model claims and therefore suggests the MSM is a valid explanation of how memory works.
Evaluate contradicted by KF as a limitation of the MSM
P: Contradicted by the case study of KF
E: KF’s short-term memory for digits was very poor when they read them out loud to him (sound). However, his recall was much better when he could read the digits to himself (visual).
E: Limitation of the MSM because the case study suggests STM is not unitary, but instead is split into separate visual and acoustic stores. This makes one of the claims that STM is unitary invalid.
Further E: However, evidence from brain-damaged patients may not be reliable because it concerns unique cases with patients who have had traumatic experiences.
Evaluate contradicted my the WMM as a limitation of the MSM
P: A limitation of the multi-store model is that STM is no longer regarded as a single store.
E: The working memory model clearly demonstrates that STM is made up of at least three separate components: the Central Executive; the Phonological Loop; and the Visuo-Spatial Scratchpad.
E: This is a limitation as STM is thought to be more complex than the multi-store model suggests and therefore the MSM may not be a valid explanation of memory.
