Evaluation of the Multi Store Model
The multi store model of memory was one of the first models of memory to provide a systematic account of the structures and processes that make up memory. It has been an influential model and has lead to the development of other more sophisticated theories such as the working memory model.
There is also considerable research supporting the claims of the multi store models existence of different stores.
For example, research by Sperling (1960) showed support for the capacity and duration of sensory memory being different to that of short term memory. The research by Sperling demonstrated that we can access more than 9 bits of information if we try and access them quickly enough from sensory memory but if this is left longer than 1 second this access fades away.
Research by Miller demonstrates that short term memory operates as a limited capacity store by demonstrating that it can only hold between 5 and 9 bits of information before becoming overloaded resulting in information being displaced.
Petersen and Petersen (1959) demonstrated that short term memory has a limited time span of around 20 seconds and without rehearsal the information soon fades.
Furthermore, support for the existence of separate short term and long term memory stores comes from serial position effect experiments carried out by Glanzer and Cunitz (1966). They found that participants recalled more words from the beginning (the primacy effect) and the end of a list of words (the recency effect). This suggests that the earlier words in the list had been transferred to long term memory and that words later in the list were still in short term memory.
Terry (2005) tested recall for serial position effects in the recall of television adverts which supports earlier laboratory experiments.
Case studies such as the case of Clive Wearing have also been used to support the existence of different memory stores. Clive contracted a form of the herpes virus which damaged his hippocampus. This case of anterograde amnesia supports the multi store model as his short term memory had been left largely intact but he could not transfer new memories from short term memory to long term memory.
Nowadays most cognitive psychologists argue that multi store model provides a limited and simplistic explanation of memory processed. For example the levels of processing approach demonstrates that information is not transferred to long term memory simply by rehearsal but involves more sophisticated processing. The model also can not explain why we often clearly remember highly emotional events. Such memories are called flash-bulb memories.
There is also considerable research that challenges the multi store model of memory. For example Warrington and Shallice’s case study of K.F. found that despite a damaged short term memory K.F. was still able to form new long term memories. Following a motorcycle accident it was found that K.F.’s dgit span (capacity in STM) was nearly zero and since short term memory is, according to the multi store model of memory the gateway to long term memory his long term memory should have been severely impaired. However it was found that K.F. was still able to form new long term memories suggesting that there is another way to access long term memory other than the model suggests.
Similarly the case study of Clive Wearing can be used to challenge the multi store model as Clive was able improve with practice on various skills based tasks such as playing piano. This type of memory is known as procedural memory. Many psychologists now argue that there are more than one type of long term memory store including an episodic memory (e.g. autobiographical), semantic memory (facts) and procedural which the multi store model does not take into account.
Despite the multi store model receiving much experimental support most of these experiments are very artificial. For example, they lack ecological validity in the way they often use word lists which are not a valid indication of how we actually learn and recall things in everyday life.