THE MODAL MODEL. Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968). rehearse. Sensory Information Store. Short Term Memory (STM). Long Term Memory (LTM). recode. input. retrieve. Sperling’s (1960) Partial Recall Effect. R. N. K. P. X. V. B. M. L. V. F. J.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968)
Partial Recall instruction produces better performance than Total Recall instruction.
Effect lasts for up to half a second.
Sperling’s (1960) Partial Recall Effect
- Suggests at a sensory storage level, All information is available.
Neisser (1964) and Plomp (1967)’s Masking Effects
- Quantify the very short duration of visual and acoustic information in the sensory store.
Serial Position Effect
Differences in Storage Capacity
Difference in Retrieval
The Serial Position Effect
Effect of Distraction (Postman and Phillips, 1965)
Suggests persistence of STM information, and therefore recency effect, relies on rehearsal
Effect of inter-item time (Glanzer and Cunitz, 1966)
Suggests transfer of information from STM to LTM depends on rehearsal
Effect of rehearsal on recall (Craik and Watkins, 1973)
Surprise test for all B-words in a controlled list suggests that amount of rehearsal does not predict likelihood of recall
Differences in Storage Capacity:
STM – limited
LTM – unlimited
STM loss of information is due to displacement
LTM loss of information is due to interference
But: STM capacity is hard to quantify
STM capacity shows interference effects from LTM
- casts doubt on the independence of STM and LTM stores
Differences in Retrieval:
STM – exhaustive search
LTM – guided parallel search
STM – shows set size effect (Sternberg)
LTM – shows no set size effect
BUT LTM retrieval can show a set size effect too (Anderson, 1983)
- Suggests that STM and LTM retrieval may not be so different
STM retrieval can be affected by what is being retrieved (Cavanagh, 1972)
- Suggests that STM retrieval is not just a matter of the number of things to search exhaustively.
Patients HM and KF demonstrate a double-dissociation of STM and LTM
HM shows damaged LTM but intact STM
KF shows damaged STM but intact LTM
Modal model would predict no new learning in KF
Evidence to the contrary suggests that the modal model may be too simplistic
The modal model is one of the most influential modern approaches to human memory
Memory is a multi-store system
The model is capable of guiding predictions and enquiry
The model is supported by early empirical research
A good start but ultimately too simplistic