AO3: MSM

• 1: Lots of supporting lab-based evidence


  Controlled studies support the existence of separate STM and LTM stores. For example, research into coding by Baddeley or research into duration by Peterson & Peterson and Bahrick et al. These differences support the basis of the MSM that LTM and STM are two different stores as they code in different ways/ have different durations.
• 2: Supporting evidence from case studies

  Evidence from patients who have suffered brain injury or trauma shows that they lose functioning in either STM or LTM, never both. For example, HM had his hippocampus removed to treat his seizures, however it meant he lost functioning in his STM. He couldn't form new memories but he could recall long-term memories from before surgery (famous faces, his childhood). He did manage to learn new procedural memories. HM couldn't transfer information from the STM to LTM meaning that they must be separate stores within the brain.
• 3: Overly simplistic model of human memory

  It may be too simplistic to suggest that something as complex as human memory can be explained into two single unitary stores; STM and LTM. For example, the WMM suggests that STM is broken down into 4 separate stores. And there could also be more than one LTM; episodic (HM's childhood memories), procedural (CW's piano playing) and semantic (HM's memory of famous people). So therefore, the model oversimplifies memory by not taking these different stores into account.
• 2. Case studies of BDP

  However, there are issues with relying on evidence from BDP. It lacks population validity, we don't know what memory was like before the injury/illness and we don't know the extent of the damage.
• 2. Case studies of BDP: Clive Wearing
• 2. Case studied of BDP: Clive Wearing

  CW had a viral illness which meant that he lost functioning in his STM. Now, he cannot transfer STM information to LTM. He can recall LTM information from before his illness like his wife and playing the piano but now cannot form new long term memories.