2
In conclusion, Sebastian and Hernandez-Gil was artificial and not ecologically valid, but
its conclusions can be replicated as they were supported by other studies looking at
different cultures.
● Evaluate the working memory model (8)
One strength of the working memory model (WMM) is that there is experimental
research evidence to support the model. The model proposes that there are 2 slave
systems that make up part of the model. One of the slave systems is known as the
phonological loop which deals with auditory information (spoken and written) and
preserves word order. Thi can be further subdivided into the phonological store that
holds words heard (speech perception) for 1-2 seconds (inner ear) and the articulatory
process which holds words heard/seen and silently repeated (looped) like an inner
voice (speech production). The support for the role of the phonological loop as a slave
system, comes from a study conducted by Baddeley (2003). For example, Baddeley
(2003) tested participants’ recall of similar sounding letters (E,G,P,etc) and found that
they got lower scores than with dissimilar letters (W,X,K,etc). If the phonological loop is
overloaded, that would explain this. This supports the notion of the role of the
phonological loop. This is good as it suggests that the model is credible as it has
scientific research to support the components of the model. However, studies such as
this which support WMM lack ecological validity because they are unrealistic and
artificial. For instance, Baddeley’s lists of similar sounding words are not an ordinary
everyday activity and don’t tell us how memory works in normal situations. This means
that the research which supports the model may be flawed, which may also undermine
the credibility of the model itself.
In conclusion, the WMM is a highly influential model which has developed our
understanding of memory. It has both case study and experimental research to support
it. However, more work is needed to better clarify some of the key components such as
the central executive and the episodic buffer. To develop the model further, more
discussion is required surrounding the role of long term memory which the model
overlooks.
Evaluate the theory of reconstructive memory (8)
A weakness with the original studies into Reconstructive Memory is that they
were not very scientific. For example, Bartlett showed how participants changed The
War of the Ghosts to fit in with their own expectations and understanding, such as
In conclusion, Sebastian and Hernandez-Gil was artificial and not ecologically valid, but
its conclusions can be replicated as they were supported by other studies looking at
different cultures.
● Evaluate the working memory model (8)
One strength of the working memory model (WMM) is that there is experimental
research evidence to support the model. The model proposes that there are 2 slave
systems that make up part of the model. One of the slave systems is known as the
phonological loop which deals with auditory information (spoken and written) and
preserves word order. Thi can be further subdivided into the phonological store that
holds words heard (speech perception) for 1-2 seconds (inner ear) and the articulatory
process which holds words heard/seen and silently repeated (looped) like an inner
voice (speech production). The support for the role of the phonological loop as a slave
system, comes from a study conducted by Baddeley (2003). For example, Baddeley
(2003) tested participants’ recall of similar sounding letters (E,G,P,etc) and found that
they got lower scores than with dissimilar letters (W,X,K,etc). If the phonological loop is
overloaded, that would explain this. This supports the notion of the role of the
phonological loop. This is good as it suggests that the model is credible as it has
scientific research to support the components of the model. However, studies such as
this which support WMM lack ecological validity because they are unrealistic and
artificial. For instance, Baddeley’s lists of similar sounding words are not an ordinary
everyday activity and don’t tell us how memory works in normal situations. This means
that the research which supports the model may be flawed, which may also undermine
the credibility of the model itself.
In conclusion, the WMM is a highly influential model which has developed our
understanding of memory. It has both case study and experimental research to support
it. However, more work is needed to better clarify some of the key components such as
the central executive and the episodic buffer. To develop the model further, more
discussion is required surrounding the role of long term memory which the model
overlooks.
Evaluate the theory of reconstructive memory (8)
A weakness with the original studies into Reconstructive Memory is that they
were not very scientific. For example, Bartlett showed how participants changed The
War of the Ghosts to fit in with their own expectations and understanding, such as
