Multi-store memory model AO3

• How does Baddeley support the multi store memory model?


  > Participants tend to mix up words that are ACOUSTICALLY similar when using STM. mix up SEMANTICALLY similar words when using LTM.

  - Shows that LTM + STM are different in terms of encoding. Supports the idea that they are separate, independent stores
• How does Glanzer support the multi store memory model?


  > Participants remembered a list of words. More words were remembered from the beginning (entered LTM as revised for longer - primary effect) and from the end (still in STM - recency effect). Words from the middle were displaced.

  - Supports it being linear, STM + LTM are 2 distinct components
• How does HM case study support the multi store memory model?


  > STM that functioned normally but couldn't rehearse information (due to the removal of hippocampus) to create new LTMs

  - had trouble forming new explicit memories

  - Working memory + procedural memory

  - IQ was normal

  - Couldn't remember anyone he met after surgery

  
  

  - Supports the linear model, information needs to be rehearsed in STM in order for it to be encoded into LTM
• How does Campitelli compete against the multi store memory model?


  > STM + LTM are integrated and STM is the current part of LTM, focus on attention

  - Linearity of the model may be incorrect
• What is the issue with Glanzers study being a lab experiment?


  Doesn't represent memory in real life
• How does KF case study compete against the multi store memory model?


  > LTM functioned normally despite his STM being damaged after bike accident. STM better when he read

  - Challenges linear nature, STM may be made of several parts
• What is the negative of the multi store memory model being reductionist?


  Over-simplified into three distinct stores.