Explain multi store style of memory

Many theorists suggest that the memory space system is divided into three stores. A substantial theory of this type was proposed by Atikinson and Shiffrin (1968) which essay is going to explain and measure the multi-store style of memory. Apart from becoming the typical information of the memory space system; it is also belived that, their model grew up from the information processing approach, which is extracted from communication and computer technology. The main emphasis in this model is the distinction between brief and long-term memory.

According to the approach, storage area is characterised as a move of information through a system, which is split into a set of stages and information goes by through each level in a place series. Atikinson and Shiffrin proposed that exterior stimuli from the environment first get into sensory electric motor, where they can be recorded for very brief periods of time, before being handed down to S. T. M. Short-term memory contains only the tiny amount of information that is really in productive use at any one time. Information at this time can be encoded Ionically (through the eye) or echoically (through the hearing). They believed that storage area traces in STM are fragile and can be lost within thirty moments unless if they're rehearsed. Information that is rehearsed is then offered to the long-term storage store, where it can remain for a life time unless it gets lost through decay or interference. They discussed that coding in LTM is assumed to be in terms of so this means also called semantic.

A crucial facet of the multi-store model is that there surely is experimental facts which claim that STM and LTM operates differently in terms of capacity and length. People who have brain damage have also contributed to the study and use of this model gives rise to memory space impairment. On the other hand we can look at some weaknesses of the MSM. Although Atikinson and Shiffrin thought that information is transferred into LTM by rehearsing, other psychologists argued that deep processing was necessary to transfer information. Others have criticised it to be simple and inflexible which it does not consider of factors including the strategies people employ to keep in mind things. Emphasis is put on the amount of information that may be processed somewhat than its character. The MSM is also criticised for not placing into account, that some things are better to bear in mind than others due to distinctive meaning and that the flow of information through the system is interactive rather than sequential as advised by Atikinson and Shiffrin.

Further in this essay, a discussion in the case research of Clive Putting on, is going to explain how it supports the multi-store style of storage. Baddeley (1997) points out that Clive Wearing had not been only highly informed but also a broadcaster who experienced great ability as a musician. In 1985, he contracted a viral illness (encephalitis) that kept him with intensive brain harm that brought on him to acquire major ram disorder. Although he retained his musical skills in addition to be able to discuss, read and write, his ram remained really impaired. He previously an obsessive thought that convinced him that he previously just woken up and placed a diary for this thought. This was noticeable through his better half whom he could greet as if he had not seen her in a long time, though sometimes she'd just have left a the area for a few momemts. Clive cannot use days gone by to anticipate the future. He referred to his situation as "hell on the planet, it's like being dead. " Page 2, Cardwell M, Clark L and Meldrum C (2000) Psychology for AS level.

The above circumstance supports Atikinson and Shiffrin's model, due to the fact that they point to a clear difference between STM and LTM, especially in conditions of duration, capacity and effects of brain destruction and forgetting mechanisms. Murdock (1962) also carried out an experiment by asking individuals to learn a set of words and recall them. He discovered that words which were presented previously in the list or at the end were those that often recalled than what in the centre, so in support of the MSM, he recommended that the words put into LTM were those that came before in the list and the ones at the end travelled into STM. However, he said words that were in the center of the list have been there too much time to be presented in the STM, but not long enough to be placed into LTM.

Though the model shows that information that is rehearsed is transferred into LTM, some studies show that it's not essential. According to Eysenck and Keane (1990), they gave an example that people may remember certain things because they have got relevant meaning and this could range from being funny or relevant in some way (semantic). Paivio (1971) also argued contrary to the model because a few of our LTM includes mental images from all our senses.

Warrington & Shallice analyzed and carried out intensive research on KF who was simply involved with a motorcycle incident which brought on him serious brain damage (left second-rate parietal lobe harm). This case study is likely to be used to critically measure the multi-store recollection model. Due to the car accident KF developed antegrade amnesia, meaning his memory of events before the accident was not damaged, but following the accident his memory was greatly ruined. Tests that were carried out on him confirmed that his STM was broken. Although, he had no major problems with his visual belief, he does have serious problems with his auditory information.

The above results opposed the MSM, and it was criticised, because KF could recall past happenings despite harm to his STM, whereas Atkinson and Shiffrin had said that it was possible to recall information from LTM to STM, which couldn't have been possible regarding KF. Conclusions on the above case, was attracted to show that there surely is several type of STM, which helped bring further criticism on the MSM


The idea of reconstructive memory is related to schema theory. In the overdue 1930's, it was assumed that memory space involved remembering the info presented to us, but Bartlett argued that recollection was often more difficult than that because knowledge in the form of schemas has an impact on our memory. According to Bartlett, we organise our stories in a manner that fits in with our previous experience, or schemata. Whenever we remember events, spaces in our storage area are reconstructed based on our schema. Bartlett directed to investigate the effects of schemas on individuals' recall. Schemas include previous expectations, behaviour, prejudices and stereotypes. The study was predicated on Bartlett's schema theory, which expresses that memory consists of an active reconstruction. According to the theory, what people remember will depend on two factors of information presented to us and misrepresentation created by our perception on schemas. These distortions would be most likely to occur when the individuals, schemas were of little importance to the reality being learned.

In one of is own studies, Bartlett carried out a natural test by evaluating twenty British speaking individuals, who had to learn a UNITED STATES Indian fork story called "The war of the Ghosts", and acquired to recall the storyline afterwards. The storyline being from a different culture, he assumed that it would discord with the individuals' prior knowledge contained in their schemas.

Bartlett found considerable distortions in the individuals' recollections. The distortions increased over successive recalls and most of these reflected the members' attempts to make the story similar to a story using their own culture.

Bartlett concluded that the exactness of memory is low. The changes to the storyplot on recall exhibited that the participants were positively reconstructing the storyline to fit to match their existing schemas, so his schema theory was backed. He believed that schemas influence retrieval rather than encoding or storage space. He also figured, memory was permanently being reconstructed because each successive duplication exhibited more changes, which contradicted Bartlett's original expectation that the reproductions would eventually become set.

Bartlett's research provided some of the first facts, that that which you remember depends in an important way on our earlier knowledge in the form of schemas. His research possessed more ecological validity than most recollection research, because schemas play a major role in day-to-day recollection. Though he assumed that the distortions in recall produced by his members were due to genuine issues with memory space, the instructions he used were vague. It is presumed that many of the distortions may have been guessed by the individuals in order to make their recall seem reasonable and complete.

Some psychologists argued that Bartlett's research lacked objectivity. They presumed that well manipulated experiments will be the only way to create objective data and described his research as casual. However, it is known that well- handled experiments that contain been completed in recent years, have effectively shown the reconstructive Schemas on memory. Generally Bartlett and other reconstructive storage experts have been accused of over- emphasizing the factual problem of memory and using unusual material to support the reconstructive aftereffect of schemas on ram.


Eyewitness memory analysts are considering the process of encoding, stocking and retrieving remembrances of true to life events and how appropriate these may be. For instance in courts of warfare, eyewitness testimony is trusted as research. Bartlett's research on reconstructive ram has had important implications for the reporting of events requiring great correctness such such as eyewitness testimony. The reconstructive approach is known to have particular relevance for storage of real-life events.

Bartlett explained that as humans, we do not simply store a copy of what we want to keep in mind but we create memories by incorporating existing knowledge with new materials. In other words he recommended that memory is seen as a dynamic process. He also suggested that retrieval includes reconstructing the ensuing recollections for example 2 people can easily see the same event, but may remember quite different things about the same event anticipated to building their memory in their own ways.

Loftus considered Bartlett's view of storage as reconstructive, so he used it in his investigations of eyewitness testimony. His discussion was about the data given by witnesses in courtroom conditions as having a higher percentage of unreliability.

Loftus and Palmer (1974r4t) carried out an experiment where they demonstrated a 30 - second video tutorial tape of two vehicles being involved in an automobile accident. They later asked their participants several questions about the collision, but the questions were in the framework of how the participant's judged the rate. One group specifically was asked about the rate both cars were visiting when they 'strike', whereas in other groupings the word strike was changed buy 'smashed', 'collided', 'bumped' or 'contacted'. The words that were found in the above study acquired different implication with regard of the wisdom that was made about the rate and power of impact.

Page 2, Cardwell M, Clark L and Meldrum C (2000) Mindset for AS level


Cardwell M, Clark L and Meldrum C (2000) Psychology for AS level, HarperCollins Publishers

Haralambos M & Grain D, (2002) Psychology in Concentrate, Causeway Press

Also We Can Offer!

Other services that we offer

If you don’t see the necessary subject, paper type, or topic in our list of available services and examples, don’t worry! We have a number of other academic disciplines to suit the needs of anyone who visits this website looking for help.

How to ...

We made your life easier with putting together a big number of articles and guidelines on how to plan and write different types of assignments (Essay, Research Paper, Dissertation etc)