Multi-store model - Atkinson + Shiffrin 1968
The early work of Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968) suggests that memory is made up of
3 separate stores/systems which information moves through → The distinctions
among the three structures is made on the basis of three characteristics;
● capacity (how much information can be held)
● duration (how long it lasts for)
● encoding (how information is registered)
● We receive information from the environment through our senses, which is
automatically stored briefly in a sensory register → Information is held there
for a short time (up to 2 seconds) → The material in the sensory register that
is attended to is coded in short-term memory
● Coding and rehearsal determine the fate of this information
○ Rehearsal is seen as a key process as it not only keeps information in
STM → also responsible for transferring it to LTM → information not
rehearsed it is lost
● Information in the STM is stored (encoded) in auditory form
○ duration of UP TO 30 seconds
○ capacity of between 5 and 9 chunks of information.
● Information is held in the LTM in semantic form ( according to meaning)
○ can last for (potentially) forever.
, STM LTM
CAPACITY 7 bits of info → 7±2 Unlimited
(Milners magic number)
DURATION 15-30 seconds unaided Few seconds → several
Increased by rehearsal years
ENCODING Acoustic Semantic
Acoustic
Visual
Free recall and serial position effect
● Primacy effect – Subjects tend to recall the first words of the list well
○ indicates that the first words entered STM → had time to be rehearsed
and passed on to long term memory before the STM capacity was
reached
○ The primacy effect, therefore, involves recall from long term memory.
● The middle items of the list are remembered far less well than those at the
beginning and the end.
○ increasing number of items fills the limited capacity of the STM and
these later items are unable to be properly rehearsed and transferred
to LTM before they are displaced.
● Recency effect – Subjects usually recall those items from the end of the list
first, and tend to get more of these correct on average than all the earlier
items.
○ This effect persists even if the list is lengthened (Murdock, 1962), and
is thought to be due to recall from the STM store → since the items at
the end of the list were the last to enter STM and were not displaced
by further items.
STRENGTHS
+ Terry (2005) → tested recall for adverts (a more realistic task) and found that
with delayed recall adverts at the beginning of the list were best remembered
(primacy) and with immediate recall adverts at the end of the list were
, remembered best (recency), thus fully supporting the claims of the MSM in a
more ecologically valid task
+ Brown (1958) and Peterson and Peterson (1959) → offered research to
support that found that blocking rehearsal resulted in poor recall offering
+ support to the suggestion that rehearsal is an important factor for
retaining information in our memory systems
+ Conrad (1964) → showed ppts a sequence of 6 consonants that were either
acoustically similar or dissimilar → ppts frequently made errors
+ Suggests that we must convert visual material into acoustic to
process material → E.G. saying a phone number in your head until
you can write it down
+ Peterson & Peterson (1959) → ppts saw a trigram and then had to count
backwards in 3’s
+ Conclused that information disappears or decays rapidly if rehearsal is
prevented
+ Supports STM
+ Bahrick (1975) → 392 graduates from a high school in America over a
50-year period being shown photographs from their high school yearbook.
+ For each photo, participants were given a group of names and asked
to select the name that matched the person in the photo.
+ 90% correct 14 years after graduation → 70% accurate after 48 years.
+ Bahrick concluded that people remember certain types of information
for almost a lifetime.
WEAKNESSES
- Patient K.F was injured in a motorcycle accident and received a 'closed
head injury', which means there was quite a lot of widespread brain damage.
- Warrington and Shallice (1970) → examined and tested K.F. and discovered
that his capacity in STM was nearly zero → Since STM is the gateway to
LTM, according to the Multi–Store Model, his LTM should have been severely
impaired
The early work of Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968) suggests that memory is made up of
3 separate stores/systems which information moves through → The distinctions
among the three structures is made on the basis of three characteristics;
● capacity (how much information can be held)
● duration (how long it lasts for)
● encoding (how information is registered)
● We receive information from the environment through our senses, which is
automatically stored briefly in a sensory register → Information is held there
for a short time (up to 2 seconds) → The material in the sensory register that
is attended to is coded in short-term memory
● Coding and rehearsal determine the fate of this information
○ Rehearsal is seen as a key process as it not only keeps information in
STM → also responsible for transferring it to LTM → information not
rehearsed it is lost
● Information in the STM is stored (encoded) in auditory form
○ duration of UP TO 30 seconds
○ capacity of between 5 and 9 chunks of information.
● Information is held in the LTM in semantic form ( according to meaning)
○ can last for (potentially) forever.
, STM LTM
CAPACITY 7 bits of info → 7±2 Unlimited
(Milners magic number)
DURATION 15-30 seconds unaided Few seconds → several
Increased by rehearsal years
ENCODING Acoustic Semantic
Acoustic
Visual
Free recall and serial position effect
● Primacy effect – Subjects tend to recall the first words of the list well
○ indicates that the first words entered STM → had time to be rehearsed
and passed on to long term memory before the STM capacity was
reached
○ The primacy effect, therefore, involves recall from long term memory.
● The middle items of the list are remembered far less well than those at the
beginning and the end.
○ increasing number of items fills the limited capacity of the STM and
these later items are unable to be properly rehearsed and transferred
to LTM before they are displaced.
● Recency effect – Subjects usually recall those items from the end of the list
first, and tend to get more of these correct on average than all the earlier
items.
○ This effect persists even if the list is lengthened (Murdock, 1962), and
is thought to be due to recall from the STM store → since the items at
the end of the list were the last to enter STM and were not displaced
by further items.
STRENGTHS
+ Terry (2005) → tested recall for adverts (a more realistic task) and found that
with delayed recall adverts at the beginning of the list were best remembered
(primacy) and with immediate recall adverts at the end of the list were
, remembered best (recency), thus fully supporting the claims of the MSM in a
more ecologically valid task
+ Brown (1958) and Peterson and Peterson (1959) → offered research to
support that found that blocking rehearsal resulted in poor recall offering
+ support to the suggestion that rehearsal is an important factor for
retaining information in our memory systems
+ Conrad (1964) → showed ppts a sequence of 6 consonants that were either
acoustically similar or dissimilar → ppts frequently made errors
+ Suggests that we must convert visual material into acoustic to
process material → E.G. saying a phone number in your head until
you can write it down
+ Peterson & Peterson (1959) → ppts saw a trigram and then had to count
backwards in 3’s
+ Conclused that information disappears or decays rapidly if rehearsal is
prevented
+ Supports STM
+ Bahrick (1975) → 392 graduates from a high school in America over a
50-year period being shown photographs from their high school yearbook.
+ For each photo, participants were given a group of names and asked
to select the name that matched the person in the photo.
+ 90% correct 14 years after graduation → 70% accurate after 48 years.
+ Bahrick concluded that people remember certain types of information
for almost a lifetime.
WEAKNESSES
- Patient K.F was injured in a motorcycle accident and received a 'closed
head injury', which means there was quite a lot of widespread brain damage.
- Warrington and Shallice (1970) → examined and tested K.F. and discovered
that his capacity in STM was nearly zero → Since STM is the gateway to
LTM, according to the Multi–Store Model, his LTM should have been severely
impaired
