AO3

• Multi-Store Memory Model: Evaluation Points

  • Glancer & Cunitz Support
  • Doesn't support individual difference
  • Over-simplified and over-emphasised
• Multi-Store Memory Model: Glancer & Cunitz Support


  Glancer and Cunitz proposed the serial position effect which shows evidence that there is multiple stores. They found that memory can be transferred into STM and LTM and that interference affects recall. This supports the multi-store memory model. However, the research was conducted as an artifcial task that lacks ecological validity and was in a controlled environment. This limits the validity of their findings and questions the reliability of their results to everyday life.
• Multi-Store Memory Model: Doesn't support individual differences


  The multi-store memory model was criticised for being too rigid and not supporting individual differences. Scoville & Miller investigated patient HM who had part of his hippocampus removed and was no longer able to make memories (transfer from STM to LTM), but personality and memories from before the surgery were intact. The MSM does not apply to patient HM as he was unable to rehearse and transfer memories to the LTM.
• Multi-Store Memory Model: Over-Simplified and Over-Emphasised

  The multi-store memory model has been criticised for oversimplifying STM and LTM. It only outlines sensory memory, short term memory and long term memory, however Baddeley found that there are different types of memory stores within STM; acoustic and semantic. This limits the validity of the MSM.
• Multi-Store Memory Model: Over-Simplified and Over-Emphasised

  It has also been criticised for over-emphasising the role of rehearsal. Psychologists argue that there are other ways to transfer to LTM, and Bahrick identified that many studies that highlight the role of rehearsal lack ecological validity.