Evaluating of the working memory model Thanks to my visuo-spatial sketchpad I have made it back to my CASTLE!!!

CASTLES Evidence comes from.. Baddeley (74) who found on his dual performance tasks, that when two simultaneously performed tasks use the same component of working memory, performance on those tasks suffers BUT…when two tasks involve different parts of working memory, performance on those tasks do not suffer These findings support the existence of the different sub-components of working memory as proposed by the model

CASTLES Supporting evidence comes from….. There is evidence from cognitive-neurological studies on patients with brain damage which supports the working memory model Shallice & Warrington (70) found that patient KF had difficulties recalling auditory information from STM but not visual information This suggests that his damage mainly affected the phonological loop as he appeared to be able to use the visuo-spatial sketch pad This also supports the idea of multiple components to STM, as proposed by the working memory model

CASTLES Supporting evidence also comes from…..fMRI scans Bunge et al (2000) found that when Ppts were doing a dual-task, fMRI scans showed significantly more activation This shows that the increased attentional demands of the two simultaneous tasks increased brain activity This provides support for the proposed role of the central executive as the aspect which directs attention and allocates resources

CASTLES However there are a number of limitations associated with studies of patients with brain damage Most studies of brain damage are case studies; whilst case studies provide a lot of detail, the subjects may have unique characteristics which mean that they are not representative of anyone else except themselves It is also not possible to make before and after comparisons of their memory deficits The trauma of the brain injury may have resulted in numerous changes in the brain and therefore behaviour These limitations undermine the extent to which we can rely on studies of patients with brain damage to evaluate the working memory model

CASTLES It could be argued that the role of the CE is a little vague…What exactly is ‘directing attention’ and ‘allocating resources’? It is possible that the CE, like the other aspects of the model, is also not unitary Conflicting evidence comes from Eslinger & Damasio (1985) whose patient EVR performed well on reasoning tasks but not on problem-solving tasks given that both tasks would involve the CE, this suggests that the CE has sub-components involved with each task respectively – there is more research to do therefore!

CASTLES ..useful…Application The insights from the working memory model can be used in psychopathology Park et al (1999) has suggested that working memory deficits can be used to differentiate between ‘normal’ patients, and those with schizophrenia If this is true, it could be used as a diagnostic tool However, it could be that working memory deficits occur in other forms of psychopathology also (eg. anxiety disorders), and that working memory abnormalities may not necessarily indicate schizophrenia but a more generic possibility of mental illness

Describe and evaluate the working memory model (12) How to evaluate Describe and evaluate the working memory model (12)