MSM -

The Multistore Model of memory consists of three separate stores for memory. The sensory store, which
holds information received directly from the senses, encodes it in the same way and has a large capacity.
It stores it for less than one second, then transfers it into the short-term store, which encodes it
acoustically and can hold about seven bits of information. After holding it for 30 seconds, if the
information is rehearsed, it’ll be transferred into the long-term store which stores it semantically, has an
unlimited capacity and can store the information for a lifetime. It A strength of this theory is that
Murdock’s study validated it. This is because the study showed that the short-term and long-term
memory stores and separate. In his study, the majority of the participants recalled the first and last
words they heard. The first words were rehearsed and transferred to the long-term store, while the last
words replaced the middle words in the short-term store. This increases the validity of the theory.
Another strength of this theory is that we can use practical applications. This means we can apply what
we have learnt to our everyday lives to help people. Our understanding of the MSM can help students
revise, as it teaches us that we need to rehearse information in order to remember it. Therefore, the
MSM is useful as it’s improving people’s lives. A weakness of this theory is that it doesn’t account for
flashbulb memories. These are memories of emotional importance, which are remembered by a person
whether they are rehearsed or not. They are stored in the long-term memory store for a while. This
contradicts the theory as it states that in order to get information in the long-term store you need to
rehearse it. This decreases the validity of the theory.
LONG-TERM MEMORY -
This theory states that there are three types of long term memory. Episodic memory, which consists of
personal events that happened in our lives. Semantic memory, which consists of facts and general
knowledge. And procedural memory, which is our muscle memory used to carry out action skills. A
strength of this theory is that it has supporting evidence from Tulving’s gold study. This is because Tulving
conducted a PET brain scan where he tested participants for their semantic and episodic memories. His
results showed that episodic memory activated the front of the brain, while semantic activated the back,
showing that they’re separate. This increases the validity of the theory. Another strength of this theory is
that it’s supported by the case study conducted on Clive Wearing. His procedural memory was intact, so
he could carry out skills like playing the piano, but his episodic memory wasn’t, as he couldn’t recall
personal events like his wedding day. This provides evidence for this theory as it shows that there are
three different stores for these memories, as if there was one, he would remember everything or
nothing. This increases the validity of the theory. A weakness of this theory is that semantic and episodic
are two different stores. This is because all semantic memories begin as episodic memories. You must
have a personal experience in order to remember a fact. This shows that there is a link between both
memories. This decreases the validity of the theory.
RECONSTRUCTIVE -
The Reconstructive theory of memory states that memory is not an exact copy of past events and
information we remember, and instead an active process. The process is called ‘effort after meaning’,
where we change our memories to fit our understanding of the world. We believe our memories are
accurate but they are actually distorted. Bartlett believes this happens when there are gaps in our
memories and we cannot remember small things, so we use our past knowledge to fill those gaps. A
strength of the Reconstructive theory is that Bartlett’s study supports it. In his study, participants were
asked to retell a story they read to another participant, and this kept on going, until all participants had
heard and retold the story. It was found that the story was severely altered to fit their understanding,
rather than sticking with the original story. The word ‘canoes’ was changed to ‘boats’, as participants
were more familiar with it. This shows that the participants used effort after meaning. This increases the
validity of the theory. Another strength of the Reconstructive theory is that it has practical applications.
This is because it shows us that we use the process of effort after meaning to change our memories
based on our understanding of the world. This is essential to know in the court system as it shows us that
witnesses may not provide an accurate recollection of events if they’ve altered them based on their
understanding. This shows that the theory is useful. A weakness of this theory is that it has low
ecological validity. This is because it’s supporting study was conducted in an artificial lab environment
and focuses on tasks like retelling stories that we do not come across on an everyday basis. The study
cannot be applied to real life, nor can the theory. This weakens the validity of the theory.

PIAGET -
Piaget’s theory states that there are four stages of cognitive development, and all children go through
them at roughly the same age. During the sensorimotor stage (0-2 years old), their learning occurs
through their senses and movement. They develop object permanence, which is knowing that things are
there even when you they aren’t visible. During the pre-operational stage (2-7 years old), children are
unable to apply logic to solve problems. They show egocentrism, which is the inability to see things from
others’ perspective. During the concrete operational stage (7-11 years old), they are able to apply logic
to solve physical problems. During the formal operational stage (11+ years old), they are now able to
apply logic to solve abstract and theoretical problems. A weakness of this theory is that it relies on a
study with faulty methods. In Piaget’s counters task to measure conservation, the participants were
asked the same question twice, which made them doubt their original answer and respond with one that
could contradict it. It was based more on doubt than their conservation skills, therefore, an inaccurate
measurement. This decreases the validity of the study, which decreases the validity of the theory.
Another weakness of this theory is that it has refuting evidence. This is because McGarrigle and
Donaldson found that children under the age of 7 do have conservation. Their study consisted of 4-6
year old participants, who had two equal rows of counters, and a ‘naughty teddy’ messing them up. As
the children were more familiar with toys such as this teddy bear, they were able to recognize that there
were still an even number of counters in both rows, despite the teddy’s actions. This goes against
Piaget’s theory as he stated that children don’t develop conservation skills until the age of 7. A strength
of Piaget’s study is that it has practical applications to education. This is because the concept of
readiness shows us that children should only learn certain things when they are ready to. For example,
the use of concrete objects (i.e. counters in math), will help children in the concrete operational stage
learn. This shows that it can be applied to improve the lives of others. Therefore, Piaget’s theory is
practical and useful.

DWECK -
Dweck believes the difference between those students who succeed in their learning and those who
don't is due to their mindset. People who inhibit a fixed mindset believe that intelligence is genetic, and
cannot be changed no matter what they do. When facing difficulty, they give up instead of persevering.
People who inhibit a growth mindset understand that intelligence is flexible; you can achieve anything
you want if you work hard enough. They believe that intelligence can be enhanced with time and effort.
These mindsets can change through training. A strength of this theory is that it has supporting evidence.
This is because a group of Year 7 students were put on a study skills course and spilt into two groups.
One group was given basic revision techniques, feeding a fixed mindset, and the other group was taught
that your brain changes shape everytime you learn something new, which supported a growth mindset.
Students who received the growth training achieved much higher in their exams then those who
received the fixed. This shows that your intelligence is based on your mindset, and it can be altered. This
increases the validity of the theory. Another strength of this theory is that it has practical applications to
education. This is because it shows teachers that students will be more successful with a growth
mindset. They should give their students tasks during the year to check their understanding of topics and
improve their intelligence, rather than one final exam at the end of the year. This allows them to better
their progress. Therefore, Dweck’s theory is useful.

VAK -
This theory states that each person has a different learning style. Visual learners learn by reading or
seeing pictures, they like to see what they learn and remember things by what they look like. Auditory
learners learn by listening to things, they like to hear information and speak it and remember things by
what they sound like. Kinaesthetic learners learn by moving and doing things, they like to make what
they learn and remember things best when physical activities are involved. It also states that there are
two types of people; verbalisers and visualisers. Verbalisers process information verbally and think using
words. They learn by reading things or writing them down and use verbal rehearsal to remember
information. Visualisers process information visually, think in images and learn from pictures and
diagrams. A strength of the learning styles approach is that it has practical applications to education. This
is because it offers alternatives to traditional verbal methods. We now know that students make most
progress when they learn with their preferred learning style. It encourages teachers and learners to
become familiar with their learning style to improve their grades and overall learning experience. This
shows that the theory can improve the standard of learning. A weakness of this theory is that too
many different learning styles have been suggested. This means that it is not possible to put the
approach into practice. For example, one study identified 71 different learning styles. The researcher
argued that there are too many learning styles for students to work out which style suits them. This
indicates that teachers wouldn’t be able to teach each student with their preferred learning style,
because there’s too many to put into practice. This decreases the validity of the theory.

WILLINGHAM -
Willingham’s theory states that there’s no such thing as a ‘verbaliser’ or ‘visualiser’. If students
understand the meaning of the information, the visual or audio presentation doesn’t matter. The type of
learning should fit the content being taught (e.g. auditory learning for languages). If students have
difficulty with a particular style, they should be asked to practice it. Studies show that no real evidence
that learning styles have an effect on exam grades. A weakness of this theory is that it is refuted by
learning styles. This is because the learning styles theories state that every single person has a learning
style, and if taught using that particular learning style, they should succeed academically. This goes
against Willingham as he argued that learning styles do not have any actual impact on students’ grades,
and the learning style should differ based on the content being taught. This decreases the validity of his
theory. A strength of Willingham’s theory is that it has practical applications. This is because it can help
teachers teach their students. It allows them to decide on a particular learning style to suit the content
being taught. For example, if teaching a foreign language, teachers should use an auditory learning style.
This will help the students interpret the information in a more suitable way. This should increase
students' overall grades. This shows that the theory is useful. Another weakness of Willingham’s learning
theory is that he may be taking the creativity out of learning. This is because he states that the most
important aspect of learning is that students learn the information. This may lead teachers to extract the
creativity out of learning and teach students less imaginatively. Instead of being given a range of
activities to learn, they’ll be taught plainly. This would impact students enthusiasm and grades
negatively.

GIBSON -
Gibson states that perception is innate and adaptive - we are born with it, it’s caused by evolution and
we do not need to learn to perceive. It’s direct - perception and sensation are the same thing, and we
don’t need our brains to perceive. It’s ecological - the environment provides us with enough visual cues
to perceive, and we solely rely on it to give us a sense of shape and distance. It’s based on cues - gradient
of texture, gradient of colour, and motion parallax. And it’s based on affordances - we perceive each
object in terms of how we can use it and possibilities of actions for it. A strength of Gibson’s direct
theory is that it has supporting evidence from the Visual Cliff experiment. This is because the experiment
found that infants (as young as 6 months old) who did not have any prior experience of perception did
not cross the drop. This supports Gibson as it shows that the infants took caution and refrained from
crossing the cliff, which means they had the ability to perceive depth. They also had no prior experiences
to teach them depth perception, which shows that perception must be innate. A weakness of Gibson’s
theory is that it can be considered reductionist. This is because it oversimplifies complex behavior like
perception and states that it is purely biological and derived from our genetics. His theory states that
perception is innate, direct, and that perception and sensation are the same thing. However, it does not
include how our perception can be taught through our past experiences and environmental influences.
His theory completely disregards the nurture argument. Therefore, Gibson’s theory is an incomplete
explanation of perception. Another weakness of Gibson’s theory is that it’s refuted by research. Bruner
and Minturn found that when participants see a few letters before the ambiguous figure (‘the Broken B’),
they are likely to perceive it as the letter B. And when participants see a few numbers before the figure,
they are likely to perceive it as the number 13. This shows that our perception is influenced by our past
experiences. This goes against Gibson’s theory as he says that our perception is biological. However, if
that was the case, every individual in both groups would have perceived the figuren differently, and
whether they were shown numbers or letters wouldn't affect their perception. This decreases the
validity of Gibson’s direct theory.

GREGORY -
Gregory states that our perception is constructed. We perceive the world actively, make inferences based
on past knowledge, which results in a perceptual hypothesis. Since it uses our past experiences -
perception is due to nurture and our environment. We all have different experiences and environments
which is why we all perceive things differently. And as we get older, we have more interaction with the
world, our experiences broaden and our perception becomes more sophisticated. Our culture will also
influence our perception. Visual illusions offer evidence for Gregory’s theory as they happen when our
brain misuse strategies to perceive our sensations. They trick our brain, and result in an inaccurate
inference, which shows perception uses cognitive processes. A weakness of Gregory’s theory is that it
has refuting evidence from the Visual Cliff experiment. This experiment concluded that infants as young
as 6 months old were able to perceive depth without any prior experiences. They had the ability to
recognize the cliff and refrain from crossing over it to reach their mothers. This shows that perception
may be innate. This decreases the validity of the theory. Another weakness of this theory is that it can be
considered reductionist. This is because it oversimplifies complicated behavior like perception. Gregory
focuses strictly on perception being learnt from our environment, but fails to include Gibson’s views
which include perception being biological. Gibson discusses how perception evolves with evolution, skills
our ancestors used to survive are now passed onto us through our genetics. However, Gregory’s theory
doesn’t cover any aspect of the nature argument. Therefore, his theory is an incomplete explanation of
perception. A strength of this theory is that it has supporting evidence from Bruner and Minturn’s study.
This study found that when their participants saw a few letters before the ambiguous figure (‘the Broken
B’), they perceived it as the letter B. However, when participants saw numbers before the figure, they
perceived it as the number 13. This shows that our perception is influenced by past experiences.
Therefore, this increases the validity of the theory.