Working memory model

Who created the WMM?

Baddley & Hitch AO1

WMM AO1

• An explanation of how the STM is organised & how it functions

• Model consists of 4 main components (known as slave systems) which is each different in coding & capacity

Central executive AO1

• The head of the STM which acts as a monitor of incoming data

• Makes decisions & allocates the slave systems to tasks

• Can process info from any sensory system

• Has a very limited capacity

Phonological loop AO1

• Responsible for storing auditory & verbal information eg spoken words & sounds

• Capacity is about 2 seconds of spoken words

• Divided into 2 sub-systems: the inner ear & inner voice

Inner ear AO1

• Stores words recntly heard

Inner voice (articulatory processes) AO1

• Allows maintenance rehearsal of information linked to speech production

• Without this info would decay & disappear from memory

Visuo-spatial sketchpad AO1

• Stores visual and/or spatial info

• Often called the “inner eye” because it helps us visualise things and track where they are in space

• Limited capacity

• Divided into 2 sub-systems:

• Visual cache (stores visual data)

• Inner scribe (records arrangement of objects in the visual field)

Episodic buffer AO1

• Added to model by Baddeley in 2000

• Temporary info store when the CE has no storage

• Integrates visual, spatial & verbal info processed by other stores & maintains time sequencing

• Has a limited capacity of 4 chunks (Baddeley)

• Coding is multidimensional

WMM strengths AO3

• P - there is cognitive neuroscience research to support

• E - techniques like fMRI & PET scans show distinct brain regions activated during verbal and visual-spatial tasks, such as the left prefrontal cortex for linguistic tasks and the right prefrontal cortex for spatial processing

• T - these findings align with the WMM’s claim that the WM isn’t a single store but made up of sub-systems, as well as establishing differences between the Phonological Loop and the Visuospatial Sketchpad, providing strong neural evidence for the model. Neuroimaging methods are highly objective & have high scientific credibility, reducing subjectivity or experimental bias concerns

• P - there is case study research to support

• E - Patient KF had a motorcycle accident & suffered from amnesia which affected his memory. He could recall visual info but struggled to recall verbal info, suggesting his visuo-spatial sketchpad was intact where as his impairment was specific to his phonological loop

• T - this supports the WMM’s claim that the STM isn’t unitary as the MSM suggests & supports the idea that there are separate stores of memory, increasing the WMM’s internal validity

• HOWEVER case study evidence is limited as it focuses on KF’s individual, unique experience so we can’t be sure the same results would generalise to the wider pop. Also, brain injuries have wider effects, making it hard to conclude that only the phonological loop was damaged, therefore reducing the reliability of KF as evidence for WMM

WMM limitations AO3

• P - Lieberman criticises that the WMM is limited as the visuospatial sketchpad implies that all spatial info was first visual as they’re linked

• E - However, he points out that blind people have excellent spatial awareness, although they’ve never had any visual info

• T - he argues that the VSS should be separated into 2 different components: one for visual info & one for spatial info, therefore suggesting that the WMM is incomplete & may underestimate the complexity of visuo-spatial memory, reducing internal validity

• P - there is a lack of clarity over the CE

• E - Baddeley admitted that the CE is the “least understood” component

• T - reduces explanatory power of the WMM as the CE is meant to be the most important element as it controls the other slave systems so it needs to be more clearly specific & explained. Also, it’s hard to test directly with brain scans because CE processes (attention, decision making etc) overlap with other cognitive functions so hard to isolate