Multistore memory model:
Supporting evidence (S.E):
- There is S.E for the MSM from case of HM
- He had a surgery that involved removing his hippocampus and after
surgery he couldn’t form any new LTM’s (still thinks he’s 27) but his STM
recall was normal/appeared unaffected
- This supports the idea that the STM + LTM are physically separate stores
as it suggests that one can be damaged whilst the other remains intact
- Therefore, this increases the validity of the MSM theory as it supports its
main assumption of having separate stores
Counterpoint:
- However, this study lacks generalisability
- This is because he is just one person that this has happened to, he had a
surgery to remove his hippocampus which isn't a usual surgery
- This makes his case highly unusual to the rest of the population
- Therefore, the HM study is not generalisable as this doesn’t occur to many
people, meaning we cannot generalise the MSM to all of the population,
reducing the validity of the theory
Alternative explanation:
- However, this theory may be too oversimplified
- There is evidence to support that the LTM can be further split into
procedural, episodic and semantic memory
- This means the MSM model may be too simple as it can’t identify this
- Therefore, it may lack validity/credibility due to being too simple and not
identifying other features
Real world application:
- There is real world application with the MSM
- For example, we can use our knowledge from the MSM to help us to revise
- This is because for the MSM we know the importance of attention to get a
memory from the SR into the STM, so we can use this knowledge by
making sure not to listen to music whilst revising or have phones around.
We also know the importance of rehearsal to get something from your
STM to LTM, so we can repeat info through testing and flashcards
- Therefore, this theory has helped benefit society as it has provided a way
to help is improve things such as our revision
, Types of LTM:
Supporting evidence (S.E):
- There is S.E to support diff types of LTM from the clinical case of HM
- He had episodic memory damage, but semantic memory was relatively
unaffected. For example, he couldn’t recall stroking a dog half an hour
earlier (episodic). But he knew what a dog was (semantic)
- This support the theory as it suggests there are different stores of memory
as separate ones can be damaged whilst other ones remain working
- Therefore, this theory has good validity as it supports its key ideas
Counterpoint:
- However, this study lacks generalisability
- This is because HM is just one person that this has happened to, and is
also a clinical case, meaning there could be a lack of control over variables
(for example we don’t know how good his memory was before surgery)
- He fact his semantic was unaffected but episodic was damaged could only
be relative to him, so not applicable to all the population
- Therefore, the clinical case HM study is not generalisable as these findings
may only be due to this individual, reducing the validity of the theory
Conflicting neuroimaging:
- However there has been conflicting neuroimaging research when
psychologists have tried to identify where in brain each type of memory is
stored/processed
- A study found semantic is on the left side of the prefrontal cortex and
episodic is on the right side. However other research found left side of PFC
is encoding of episodic and right side is retrieval
- This conflict suggests that it isn’t known where in the brain theses LTM
stores are as research conflicts each other
- Therefore, this reduces the validity of there being different types of LTM
stores as it isn’t known where they are in the brain
Real world application:
- This theory has provided society with beneficial real-world application as
we can help those with memory problems
- As people get older, they tend to get memory loss specific to episodic
- From this, some elderly people have undergone ‘cognitive training’ which
help to work on cognitive deficits linked to episodic memory decline (for
example using mnemonics and semantic knowledge and visual memory to
help
- Therefore, this theory has provided us with a beneficial theory as well as
contributing to helping society
Supporting evidence (S.E):
- There is S.E for the MSM from case of HM
- He had a surgery that involved removing his hippocampus and after
surgery he couldn’t form any new LTM’s (still thinks he’s 27) but his STM
recall was normal/appeared unaffected
- This supports the idea that the STM + LTM are physically separate stores
as it suggests that one can be damaged whilst the other remains intact
- Therefore, this increases the validity of the MSM theory as it supports its
main assumption of having separate stores
Counterpoint:
- However, this study lacks generalisability
- This is because he is just one person that this has happened to, he had a
surgery to remove his hippocampus which isn't a usual surgery
- This makes his case highly unusual to the rest of the population
- Therefore, the HM study is not generalisable as this doesn’t occur to many
people, meaning we cannot generalise the MSM to all of the population,
reducing the validity of the theory
Alternative explanation:
- However, this theory may be too oversimplified
- There is evidence to support that the LTM can be further split into
procedural, episodic and semantic memory
- This means the MSM model may be too simple as it can’t identify this
- Therefore, it may lack validity/credibility due to being too simple and not
identifying other features
Real world application:
- There is real world application with the MSM
- For example, we can use our knowledge from the MSM to help us to revise
- This is because for the MSM we know the importance of attention to get a
memory from the SR into the STM, so we can use this knowledge by
making sure not to listen to music whilst revising or have phones around.
We also know the importance of rehearsal to get something from your
STM to LTM, so we can repeat info through testing and flashcards
- Therefore, this theory has helped benefit society as it has provided a way
to help is improve things such as our revision
, Types of LTM:
Supporting evidence (S.E):
- There is S.E to support diff types of LTM from the clinical case of HM
- He had episodic memory damage, but semantic memory was relatively
unaffected. For example, he couldn’t recall stroking a dog half an hour
earlier (episodic). But he knew what a dog was (semantic)
- This support the theory as it suggests there are different stores of memory
as separate ones can be damaged whilst other ones remain working
- Therefore, this theory has good validity as it supports its key ideas
Counterpoint:
- However, this study lacks generalisability
- This is because HM is just one person that this has happened to, and is
also a clinical case, meaning there could be a lack of control over variables
(for example we don’t know how good his memory was before surgery)
- He fact his semantic was unaffected but episodic was damaged could only
be relative to him, so not applicable to all the population
- Therefore, the clinical case HM study is not generalisable as these findings
may only be due to this individual, reducing the validity of the theory
Conflicting neuroimaging:
- However there has been conflicting neuroimaging research when
psychologists have tried to identify where in brain each type of memory is
stored/processed
- A study found semantic is on the left side of the prefrontal cortex and
episodic is on the right side. However other research found left side of PFC
is encoding of episodic and right side is retrieval
- This conflict suggests that it isn’t known where in the brain theses LTM
stores are as research conflicts each other
- Therefore, this reduces the validity of there being different types of LTM
stores as it isn’t known where they are in the brain
Real world application:
- This theory has provided society with beneficial real-world application as
we can help those with memory problems
- As people get older, they tend to get memory loss specific to episodic
- From this, some elderly people have undergone ‘cognitive training’ which
help to work on cognitive deficits linked to episodic memory decline (for
example using mnemonics and semantic knowledge and visual memory to
help
- Therefore, this theory has provided us with a beneficial theory as well as
contributing to helping society
