Multi-store memory model:

Multi-store memory model was developed by Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968). This model has three
components: sensory memory, short-term memory, long-term memory. For information to pass
from one component certain conditions have to be met.

Research study: Glanzer and Cunitz (primacy and recency effect):

Aim: To investigate the serial position effect with and without interference from a filler activity.
Serial position effect is the tendency to recall the first and the last items on a list better than the
items in the middle.



Participants: 46 army-enlisted men.

Procedure:

• A series of 15 word lists were read out to the participants. After hearing all the words on the list
participants were required to do a free-recall task. There were three conditions:

• A free-recall task immediately after hearing the words on the list

• A filler activity (counting out loud backwards from a random number for 10seconds), then a
free-recall

• The same filler activity, but for 30seconds.

• Each participant were given 15 lists, 5 for each of the three conditions. The order of of the
conditions were random.

Dependent variable: The proportion of words that the participants recalled correctly, separately
for each of the 15 positions of the words on the list.

Independent variable: The position of the word on the list

Results:
• In the condition without the filler task, both the aspect of serial position could be observed.

• In the conditions with the filler tasks, the primacy effect stayed, but the recency effect
disappeared, more so in the 30-second condition than the 10-second condition.

Conclusion:
The results fit well into the multi-store memory model, in the following ways:

• STM and LTM are two separate memory stores

• Information moves from STM to LTM if its rehearsed, but gradually decays if it is not

• The duration of STM is around 30 seconds

As participants here the words on the list one by one, they may start rehearsing sub-vocally. As
they get to the middle of the list it becomes harder to repeat all the words, so the first words of
the list are repeated more often, and they enter LTM. That is why primacy effect does not
disappear even after the interference tasks.

The participants recall words immediately after the presentation of the list, the last several words
would not be rehearsed as often, hence would have not entered LTM. Therefore when the
interference task is introduced the participants forget the words, as the trace decays because of
the suppression of rehearsal.

Criticism:
• Emphasises structure over process. It does say enough attention to how the information flows
between the three components.

• The only mechanism that enables transfer of information from STM to LTM in this model is rote
rehearsal. This is an oversimplification.

• The model only explains the movement of information in one direction

• It’s been argued that STM and LTM are not unitary stores and should be further divided.

Working Memory Model:

This model was developed by Baddeley and Hitch (1974). It is a zoom-in on the structure of STM.
This model consists of four components: the visuospatial sketchpad, the inner ear, articulatory
rehearsal component, the central executive, the episodic buffer.

Support for the model:

• The phonological similarity: Discovered by Conard and Hull in 1964, they showed that lists of
phonologically similar letters are more difficult to remember than lists of letters that don’t sound
similar. However, the effect also appeared when the stimulus was presented in writing.

• The word length effect: Baddeley, Thompson and Buchanan in 1975; this showed that the
capacity of STM is greater than for long ones.

The explanation for these findings led to the discovery of the articulatory rehearsal component
(inner voice). The phonological similarity effect may be explained by assuming that all speech
material (even when in writing) is sub-vocally pronounced and encoded as an articulation pattern.
Letters with similar articulation patterns are more easily confused with each other. The word
length effect is explained because articulation patterns of longer words are also longer. In a given
amount of time you can sub-vocally pronounce fewer long words than short words. Further
testing was done by suppressing the inner voice. If the explanation is correct, suppressing the
inner voice (so that speech information is processed visually, for example) should result in
disappearance of both the phonological similarity effect and the word length effect. This was
observed in a number of experiments that used articulatory suppression.

Limitations of this model: The major limitation is the complexity as this makes it difficult to test
the model empirically in its entirety. Also the model only involves STM and does not include
components such the sensory memory or the LTM.

Levels of Processing:

This model was developed by Craik and Lockhart in 1972. It focuses on the depth of processing
involved in memory and predicts the deeper information is processed, the longer a memory trace
will last. Memory is just a by-product of the depth of processing of information, and there is no
clear distinction between short term and long term memory. Therefore, it’s divided into structural
processing, phonemic processing, and semantic processing.

Research study: by Craik and Tulving (1972)

Aim: To investigate how deep and shallow processing affects memory recall.

Method:
Participants were presented with a series of 60 words about which they had to answer one of
three questions.  Some questions required the participants to process the word in a deep way
(e.g. semantic) and others in a shallow way (e.g. structural and phonemic). For example:

• Structural / visual processing: ‘Is the word in capital letters or small letters?

• Phonemic / auditory processing: ‘Does the word rhyme with . . .?’

• Semantic processing: ‘Does the word go in this sentence . . . . ?

Participants were then given a long list of 180 words into which the original words had been
mixed. They were asked to pick out the original words.

Results
Participants recalled more words that were semantically processed compared to phonemically
and visually processed words.

Conclusion
Semantically processed words involve elaboration rehearsal and deep processing which results in
more accurate recall.  Phonemic and visually processed words involve shallow processing and
less accurate recall.

Strengths:
The levels of processing model changed the direction of memory research. It showed that
encoding was not a simple, straightforward process. This widened the focus from seeing long-
term memory as a simple storage unit to seeing it as a complex processing system.

Weakness:
•It does not explain how the deeper processing results in better memories.

• Deeper processing takes more effort than shallow processing and it could be this, rather than
the depth of processing that makes it more likely people will remember something.

• The concept of depth is vague and cannot be observed. Therefore, it cannot be objectively
measured.

Flashbulb Memory:

Special memory mechanism; vivid and highly detailed recollection of the circumstances
surrounding witnessing or receiving the news of an unexpected and emotionally arousing event.

Research study: Brown and Kulik

Aim:  Investigate whether people have unusually vivid memories of highly emotional events

Procedure:

• Participants in the study were 80 Americans, half of which were white, the other half
African-American

• Participants were asked to recall assassinations of famous people, like JFK.  They were
also asked to recall memories of an emotionally intense personal event, such as the
unexpected death of a family member

Results:

• Nearly all participants had very vivid memories of JFK's assassination, including where
they were and what they were doing when they first heard the news

• African-Americans also had vivid memories of the assassination of key civil rights leaders,
such as Martin Luther King Jr, who were important figures in the fight for racial equality

• Most participants (73 out of 80) also had at least one exceptionally vivid memory of an
emotionally intense personal event, the most common being the death of a parent

Conclusion: Emotionally intense events are remembered in great detail, clearly and accurately

Evaluation:
• This study supports the theory of flashbulb memory, demonstrating the link between
emotion and memory.  African-Americans had a greater emotional response to the
assassination of Martin Luther King Jr, hence remembered it better

• Although the participants seemed to remember these events clearly and vividly, the study
could not verify whether the memories were accurate or not.

• Perhaps people tell the story of JFK's assassination so many times, hence the memory
seems detailed, but perhaps the details change over time.  People may "fill in" missing
details based on their best guess, as schema theory suggests.

Research study: Neissar and Harsch

Aim: Assess the accuracy of flashbulb memories

Procedure:
• Within 24 hours of the Challenger disaster, participants (who were all American psychology
students) filled in a survey with 7 questions regarding where they were, and what they
were doing, when they heard the news of the disaster.

• 2.5 years later, participants filled in the same questionnaire again.  The researchers
compared the two versions of the questionnaire to see if participants' memories would still
be accurate, over two years later.  Participants were also asked how confident they were
(on a scale of 1 to 5)  in their memory of the event

Results:
• For most participants, there were significant discrepancies between the two
questionnaires, indicating that memory of the event had become distorted.  Out of 7
questions, only an average of 2.95 were answered identically to the original survey

• Despite the poor memory of the event, most participants felt confident that they could
remember the Challenger disaster accurately, with an average confidence rating of 4.17

Conclusion:
Although flashbulb memories may seem detailed and vivid, they may not always be accurate. 
Even when a person claims to remember an event confidently and in great detail, there is still a
good chance their memory is incorrect

Evaluation:
• The participants in the study were all American university students, so generalisability of
the findings is low.  Perhaps people from other cultures or age groups might have better
(or worse) memories

• The study involved memory of a real-life event, so ecological validity is high

• Although the Challenger disaster was certainly a shocking event, it did not have much
personal relevance for the students. In other words, the Challenger disaster was unlikely to
change the students' lives in any meaningful way.  Perhaps flashbulb memories of truly
emotional, life-changing personal events - like the death of a parent - would be
remembered more accurately

Research study: Sharot et al(2007):

Aim:  Investigate which brain regions play a role in flashbulb memory

Procedure:
• 24 participants who were in New York City at the time of the 9/11 terrorist attacks recalled
their memories of the event (and other events of that summer) while having their brain
scanned by an fMRI machine

• The participants were also asked to rate how detailed and vivid their memories were of the
9/11 attacks and other events of that summer

Results:
• Only participants who were very close to the attacks reported very detailed and vivid
memories of 9/11.  The memory of those further away from the attacks was less detailed,
as were other memories from that summer

• Participants who were close to the 9/11 attacks showed increased activity in
the amygdala when recalling the event.  The amygdala is known to be involved in emotion



Conclusion:
• Flashbulb memories are only likely to occur when witnessing a shocking event first-hand,
not merely seeing it from the distance or on the news

• The amygdala is involved in flashbulb memories, suggesting that strong emotions result in
vivid, detailed memories

Evaluation:
• This study supports the theory of flashbulb memory, as intense emotions are linked to
detailed, vivid memories.  Furthermore, the study supports Brown & Kulik's hypothesis
that a special brain mechanism is involved in flashbulb memory

• On the other hand, this study suggests that flashbulb memories are only created for
personally relevant events which are experienced first hand

• This was a small-scale study, only involving 24 participants, so should be replicated with
great numbers of participants and for different events

• The study did not verify the accuracy of participants' memories of 9/11