Baddeley & Hitch (1974)

• The Working Memory Model (WMM) is a model proposed by Baddeley and Hitch (1974).
• The working memory model proposes that the STM is an active processor made up of several stores; each section having a limited capacity. There are four separate components to WMM which include the Central Executive , phonological loop, visuo spatial sketchpad, and episodic buffer.
• The central executive is in charge of attention processes. It has a limited capacity and controls the slave systems.
• The phonological loop (PL) is a slave system controlled by the Central executive. It deals with speech based information and is made up of two separate areas. It has a limited capacity.
• Articulatory process responsible for:

  (the inner voice) allows maintenance rehearsal. Duration is believed to be 2 secs.
• The visuo-spatial sketchpad is controlled by the Central Executive. deals with the temporary storage of visual and spatial information such as light, colour and tracking movement of objects.
• The Episodic buffer is a temporary store for information. It can be seen as the storage component for the central executive. It has a limited capacity. Links working memory to LTM.
• PRO of WMM: The WMM provides an explanation for parallel processing (i.e., where processes involved in a cognitive task occur at once), unlike Atkinson and Shiffrin’s MSM.
• PRO of WMM: The model was developed based on evidence from laboratory experiments, so confounding variables could be carefully controlled to produce reliable results (that can be replicated).
• The Central Executive seems to be linked to the frontal lobes.
• CON of WMM: Despite providing more detail of STM than the multi-store model, the WMM has been criticised for being too simplistic and vague, e.g., it is unclear what the central executive is, or its exact role in attention.
• CON of WMM: Results from laboratory experiments researching the WMM will often have low ecological validity (i.e., may not relate to real life), as tasks such as repeating ‘the the the’ are arguably not representative of our everyday activities.