1. Working Memory
1974

2. The working memory model
Based on the MSM of memory
Baddeley and Hitch (1974)
Challenged the idea STM is a single store SO….the WMM includes several components that make up STM.

3. Working Memory Model

4. Components of working memory
Central Executive: Directs attention to particular tasks. It controls the other systems by determining how resources will be allocated. (Think a control tower at an airport.)
Phonological loop: Controls auditory information. Further subdivided into the phonological store (inner ear) and articulatory process (inner voice). Someone tells you phone number and you repeat it silently in your head.
Visuo-spatial sketch pad: Processes visual and spatial information (how things look and where they are).
Episodic buffer: general store. Added later (in 2000) to the model to account for things that use both visual and acoustic information.
Central Executive: Directs attention to particular tasks. It controls the other systems by determining how resources will be allocated. (Think a control tower at an airport.)
Phonological loop: Controls auditory information. Further subdivided into the phonological store (inner ear) and articulatory process (inner voice).
Visuo-spatial pad: Processes visual and spatial information (how things look and where they are).
Episodic buffer: general store. Added later to the model to account for things that use both visual and acoustic information.

5. The central executive
Controlling system that monitors and coordinates operations of the other components (slave systems).
Limited capacity and can process any sensory information: touch, smell, visual, aural etc
Attentional control:
Automatic level- based on habit (cycling to school.
Supervisory attentional level – creates new strategies.

6. The episodic buffer
Acts as a temporary and passive display store until the information is needed.
Assumed to be controlled by Central Exec. Through conscious awareness.
Resembles the concept of Episodic memory : the memory of autobiographical events (times, places, associated emotions, and other contextual who, what, when, where, why knowledge)

7. The phonological loop
Divided into 2 components: handles verbal & auditory info.
Articulatory control system- (inner voice) holds information in a verbal form (i.e. try to remember a phone number by repeating it to yourself).
- Phonological store- (inner ear) holds speech based material in a phonological form but only for seconds

8. The visuospatial sketchpad
The inner eye- deals with visual and spatial information from either sensory memory or LTM (images).

9. Evidence-dual task experiments
Baddeley and Hitch (1974)
Research this experiment
Aim:
Method:
Results:
Evaluate: strengths & limitations
Page 75 Crane text, page 22 Hannibal study guide

10. Research and summarise
Quinn & McConnel (1996) Hannibal study guide
Pickering & Gathercole (2001) pg 75. Crane text
Holmes et. al. (2008) Crane text p 76

11. Case studies that can support WMM
The details of NZ winning the 2011 World cup
Rugby is a sport

12. The Case of KF
In the 1970s, KF was in a motorcycle accident, resulting in brain damage to his left occipiatal lobe (pictured right).
STM was damaged (digit span of 1), but LTM was normal
He remembers words better if presented visually as opposed to auditorally.

13. KF’s memory
What does KF’s case study tell psychologists about memory? Which model does it support?
Although his LTM is intact, his STM is not, which supports the Multi-Store Memory model.
However, he remembers words better if presented visually rather than auditorally, which supports the Working Memory Model.

14. Aim:
Shallice and Warrington (1970) conducted a study to try and support the WMM and its different components
Procedure:
Shallice and Warrington conducted an experiment into a person known as 'KF'.
KF had brain damage and could process visual information without any problems but could not process acoustic information in the form of letters and numbers (however he could process semantic acoustic information).
He also had no problems with his long-term memory but his immediate short-term memory seemed to be impaired.
Findings:
This showed that his brain damage seemed to be restricted to his Phonological Loop.
Conclusion:
The findings of Shallice and Warrington's study supports the Working Memory Model.

15. HM’s brain compared to normal brain
The Case of HM
HM’s brain compared to normal brain

16. HM’s surgery
In the 1940s, HM had a lobotomy performed on him to correct epileptic seizures.
After the surgery, HM was no longer able to form new long-term memories. For many years, he believed that he was 27 years old, and the year was 1953.
HM had kept his procedural memory (memory for skills) but not his episodic memory (memory of events). His body knew the way to his doctor’s office, even though he didn’t!!

17. What does HM’s case tell psychologists about memory?
There are different long-term memory stores (procedural and episodic).
HM’s case also supports Peterson and Peterson’s study. His short term memory is about 20 seconds long. (thus it also supports Multi store memory model)

18. Clive Wearing
Suffered damage in Hippocampus due to a contraction of a virus
His disease left him with extensive brain damage (parts of his temporal lobes)
Suffers from Retrograde and Anterograde amnesia. MRI scanning show damage to the hippocampus and some of frontal regions.
Episodic memory and some of his semantic memory are lost.
He can still play piano (procedural), conduct music and remember his wife.
He still has his implicit memory including his emotional memory for his wife.

19. Case Studies Please answer the following questions:
In what way have the case studies we just looked at enhanced your understanding of memory?
Why do you think there are so many case studies related to memory?
Describe what research methods were likely to be used in the case studies we just looked at?
Suggest two advantages of using case studies rather than experiments.
Suggest two weaknesses.

20. Evaluation working memory model
Makes is useful for understanding all sorts of cognitive tasks, such as reading and mental arithmetic difference between ability to remember them.
Can explain why people are able to perform different cognitive tasks at the same time without disruption (multi-tasking). EG: Visual versus hearing but not two visual tasks simultaneously or two aural tasks simultaneous. Colouring in a picture whilst singing along to music EASY, though the more complex and consciously you have to process each task the harder to it can be to multi task WELL.

21. The model is an expansion on the multi-store model, it shows why some dual tasks are different, and why you cannot undertake two different visual or verbal tasks simultaneously successfully
There is much research supporting the model, including psychological lab experiments and neurophysiological research, such as brain scans showing the differences in brain activity
Patients with agnosia support the model’s separation of visuospatial components

22. other senses might have been used in real life
May lack ecological validity because most studies were done in labs thus people were not doing regular day to day memory tasks but rather contrived lab based tasks.
Because the episodic buffer was added 26 years after the original model was published, it suggests that the original model was incomplete, therefore the model may not serve as an explanation of the working memory
The model doesn’t account for all senses (it only relies on sound and sight), and much of the lab support for the model uses artificial tasks which lack validity: because the tasks are not true-to-life, you cannot guarantee that the
other senses might have been used in real life

23. Evidence to support the WM model:
Do it yourself: What evidence is there to support the Working Memory model? From the studies we have already looked at do the following:
Please present one study to support the existence of each of the following:
The Central executive Visuo-spatial sketch pad
Phonological loop Episodic buffer
Please give the names of the experimenters, the procedure, the results and the conclusions of your study. (no need if you already have written detail previously) If there is an area we don’t have a study for see if you can research one.