

Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
This outlines and evaluates Baddeley and Hitch's working memory model (WMM), expanding on the multi-store model's short-term memory. It details the phonological loop, visuospatial sketchpad, episodic buffer, and central executive. Experimental evidence, like Baddeley's dual-task study, is presented, addressing methodological issues and limitations. Case studies of brain-damaged patients, such as KF, are explored, alongside the limitations of case study evidence regarding generalizability and replicability. This provides a comprehensive overview of the WMM, its strengths, and weaknesses, useful for cognitive psychology students. It aids in understanding working memory's function, its components, empirical support, and model limitations, highlighting the importance of methodological considerations and generalizability.
Typology: Exams
1 / 2
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!


A01 - key features of WMM - ANSWERSThe working memory model, developed by Baddeley and Hitch, expands upon the short-term memory store in the multi-store model and consists of four subcomponents. The phonological loop, responsible for the order of information, auditory information, and subvocal rehearsal, has two subcomponents: the primary acoustic store and the articulatory process. The visuospatial sketchpad, with its inner scribe and visual cache, stores visual and spatial information for an ongoing task. The episodic buffer, a multimodal store, combines information from all five senses to create a memory of an experience. The central executive, responsible for allocating attention between stores, can become overloaded if it receives too much information and is not considered a store. The model provides a framework for understanding the functioning of working memory. A03 - experimental evidence - ANSWERSOne strength of the working memory model is its empirical support. For example, Baddeley's dual task study demonstrated that performing two tasks simultaneously that require the same component of working memory, such as tracking a point of light while completing a visual imagery task, leads to a decrease in performance. This suggests that the phonological loop and visuospatial sketchpad are distinct systems and have limited capacities, supporting the assumptions of the working memory model. A03: Methodological issues - ANSWERSHowever, the methodology of these experimental studies can be subject to criticism. Many of these studies lack ecological validity and mundane realism. The results collected from lab experiments may not be generalizable to other more naturalistic situations, which limits the external validity of the model. Furthermore, experiments testing the working memory model are often unlike how people use their memory in real life, which may raise questions about the model's validity and its ability to explain how we use memory in everyday situations.
A03 - supp evid from case studies - ANSWERSDespite the aforementioned limitations, the working memory model's assumptions have been supported by case studies of brain-damaged patients. For instance, KF suffered severe brain damage following a motorbike accident, which resulted in a near-total inability to form short-term memories, but only for verbal information. Interestingly, KF was still able to recall visual information, which suggests that separate visual-spatial sketchpad and phonological loop stores exist in our working memory. A03 - case studies lack some features of a science - ANSWERSOn the other hand, evidence from case studies has limitations in terms of generalizability and replicability, which are essential features of scientific research. Case studies typically focus on a single individual with unique brain damage, making it difficult to generalize the findings to the general population. Furthermore, it is not possible to replicate such unique circumstances in other research, which limits the ability to confirm the validity of the findings. Therefore, while case studies provide some evidence in support of the working memory model, they do not provide a complete or reliable explanation of memory function.