02 AQA Psychology Topic Companion Memory SAMPLE
02 AQA Psychology Topic Companion Memory SAMPLE
Psychology
Topic Companion
Memory
Contents
Memory
The multi-store model 3
Types of long-term memory 9
The working memory model 13
Explanations for forgetting 17
Eyewitness testimony 23
The cognitive interview 29
Notes 32
Revision checklist 35
Multi‐Store Model
Atkinson & Shiffrin (1968) proposed one of the earliest models of memory – the Multi‐Store Model
(MSM). They suggested that memory is made up of three components: sensory register (SR), short‐term
memory (STM) and long‐term memory (LTM). According to the model, memories are formed sequentially
and information passes from one component to the next, in a linear fashion.
Each of the three components has a specific type of coding, capacity and duration. Coding refers to the
way in which information is changed and stored in memory. Duration refers to the length of time that
information is held in the memory store and capacity refers to the amount of information that can be
stored.
Information enters the sensory register via our senses. Our sensory register has an unknown (but
supposedly unlimited) capacity and a very limited duration of less than one second (approximately 250
milliseconds). As information enters from all five senses the coding is modality specific and said to be raw,
or unprocessed, information.
Thereafter, rehearsed information is transferred to LTM, which has an unlimited capacity and a lifetime’s
duration. Information in LTM is coded semantically (by meaning) and can be retrieved from LTM to STM
when required.
information)
Unknown, but very large Unlimited
Jacobs (1887)
Miller (1956)
DURATION
Lifetime/Years
Very limited Limited (20 seconds)
Bahrick (1975)
(approximately 250 ms) Peterson & Peterson (1959)
CODING
Key Study: Miller (1956) ‘The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two’
Capacity of STM
Aim: To investigate the capacity of STM.
Method: Literature review of published investigations into perception and STM, from the 1930s to 1950s.
Results: This existing research suggested that organising stimulus input into a series of chunks enabled
STM to cope with about seven ‘chunks’, and this was why more than seven digits, words or even musical
notes could be remembered successfully. When we try to remember a phone number, which has 11 digits,
we chunk the information into groups, for example: 0767…819…45…34, so we only need to remember
four chunks of information and not 11 individual digits.
Conclusion: Organisation (or ‘encoding’) can extend the capacity of STM and enable more information to
be stored there, albeit briefly.
Although Miller’s (1956) theory is support by psychological research, he did not specify how large each
‘chunk’ of information could be and therefore we are unable to conclude the exact capacity of STM.
Consequently, further research is required to determine the size of information ‘chunks’ to understand
the exact capacity of STM.
Finally, Miller’s (1956) research into STM did not take into account other factors that affect capacity.
For example, age could also affect STM and Jacobs’ (1887) research acknowledged that STM gradually
improved with age.
Method: The participants were 24 male and female university students. The verbal items tested for recall
were 48 three‐consonant nonsense syllables (such as JBW or PDX) spelled out letter by letter. These have
since been named ‘trigrams’. There were also cards containing three‐digit numbers (such as 360 or 294).
The researcher spelled the syllable out and then immediately said a three‐digit number. The participant
had to count down backwards in either 3s or 4s (as instructed) from that number. This was to prevent
repetition of the trigram by the participant. At the end of a preset interval of between 3 and 18 seconds a
red light went on and the participant had to recall the trigram.
Furthermore, it could be argued that Peterson & Peterson’s study has low levels of ecological validity.
In this study participants were asked to recall three‐letter trigrams, which is unlike anything people
However, Peterson & Peterson’s study was highly controlled and took place in a laboratory of Indiana
University. As a result Peterson & Peterson had a high degree of control for extraneous variables, which
makes their procedure easy to replicate to test reliability.
Method: 392 American university graduates were shown photographs from their high school yearbook and
for each photograph participants were given a group of names and asked to select the name that matched
the photographs.
Results: 90% of the participants were able to correctly match the names and faces 14 years after
graduating and 60% of the participants were able to correctly match the names and faces 47 years after
graduation.
Conclusion: Bahrick concluded that people could remember certain types of information, such as names
and faces, for almost a lifetime. These results support the MSM and the idea that our LTM has a lifetime
duration (at least 47 years), and is semantically encoded.
Furthermore, Bahrick found that the accuracy of LTM was 90% after 14 years and 60% after 47 years.
His research is unable to explain whether LTM becomes less accurate over time because of a limited
duration, or whether LTM simply gets worse with age. This is important because psychologists are
unable to determine whether our LTM has an unlimited duration (like the MSM suggests), which is
affected by other factors such as getting old, or whether our LTM has a limited duration.
Finally, it could be argued that Bahrick’s study has high levels of ecological validity as the study used
real‐life memories. In this study participants recalled real‐life information by matching pictures of
classmates with their names. Therefore, these results reflect our memory for real‐life events and can
be applied to everyday human memory.
Further support for the MSM comes from psychological studies. For example, Miller (1959) supports
Baddeley and Hitch (1974) developed the working memory model (WMM) as an explanation of the
complexity of STM and a way of explaining some of the research findings that could not be accounted
for by the MSM, for example parallel processing (multi‐tasking). [These will be covered in a later
section.]
Finally, evidence from brain scans has shown that different areas of the brain are active when
performing STM tasks (hippocampus and subiculum) and LTM tasks (motor cortex). The hippocampus
is also involved in transferring short‐term memories into long‐term memories. This suggests that
different brain regions are responsible for the different components of the MSM, supporting the idea
that our memory is made up of discrete stores.
4. Complete the following table, adding the missing information (A, B, C and D) in relation to the features
of the multi‐store model.
SENSORY REGISTER SHORT‐TERM MEMORY LONG‐TERM MEMORY
CAPACITY A 7 +/‐ 2 Unlimited
DURATION B C Lifetime
Raw (Unprocessed) /
CODING Acoustic D
Modality Specific
7. According to Atkinson and Shiffrin the STM and LTM are very different. Outline how research has
demonstrated the difference between STM and LTM. (4 marks)
Exam Hint: For this question students need to link the research (e.g. Peterson & Peterson and Bahrick) to
the question and say how the results from these two studies show that the STM and LTM are different.
8. Laura still uses an old‐fashioned phone book and wanted to phone her colleague Joseph. She looked up
his number but, before she dialled the number, she got distracted by her husband and had a short
conversation with him. When she looked at her phone she had completely forgotten Joseph’s number.
Use your knowledge of the multi‐store model to explain why Laura forgot Joseph’s number. (4 marks)
Exam Hint: Sometimes students get confused with application questions such as this and focus on SR,
attention and STM, when in fact the answer requires students to focus on STM, rehearsal and LTM.
Furthermore, some students mention the concepts of maintenance and elaborative rehearsal that are
not part of the original MSM. These were introduced by Craik & Lockhart (1972) as a criticism of the
MSM, which simply relied on rehearsal.
9. Many cognitive psychologists have criticised the multi‐store model, as it fails to explain memory in
everyday life. For example, students often spend hours and hours reading through their revision notes,
but struggle to retain the information. However, these same students can remember information
found on social media even though they have only seen it once. Explain why this information presents a
criticism of the multi‐store model of memory. (4 marks)
Exam Hint: To answer this question effectively, students are required to focus on the two types of
information (revision notes and social media) and link these to a criticism of the MSM.
10. Outline and evaluate the multi‐store model of memory. Refer to research evidence in your answer.
(12/16 marks)
Exam Hint: With this question, students need to be careful when evaluating the model. For example,
when using case studies (HM, KF or Clive Wearing), students need to ensure that they explain whether or
not these support the MSM.
Checklist
Specification Content
The multi-store The multi-store model of memory: sensory register,
short-term memory and long-term memory. Features
model of each store: coding, capacity and duration.