Describe and Evaluate the MSM (16 marks)

Describe and Evaluate the MSM (16 marks)

1. A01

2. A03

   • P - Case studies E - CW & HM E -Both have damage to the hippocampus and are unable to create new LTM's L - Support that STM & LTM are separate stores
   • P - Research evidence from laboratory experiments E - Glanzer & Cunitz (Primacy - Recency Effect, 30 words presented one after each other, Pts need to recall them immediately or after short delay. E - Finding showed words at the beginning of the list were remembered as they had been rehearsed and entered LTm, whilst words at the end were still in STM. After a delay only words at the start could be remembered L- Further evidence for the existence of STM & LTM
     • P - methodological Implications E - Case studies - one person or a small group of unique cases therefore difficult to generalise to the wider population E - Laboratory studies such as G&C lacks ecological validity as it very rare to learn a list of 30 unrelated words and have to recall them immediately or with a few minutes delay L - Therefore this questions both the validity and ability to replicate such research and applying to others.
   • P - Case study as evidence against E - K.F. involved in motorbike accident, damage to hippocampus Damage to the hippocampus. E - He was able to complete visual but not verbal tasks L - therefore it suggests STM is not a single store as originally suggested, but instead made of separate componenets.
   • P - Maintenance rehearsal is not always necessary E - Craick & Lockharts proposal of processing is more important than rehearsal E - we do not have to rehearse all information to place it into LTM, if something is more meaningful to us it can go into LTM without maintenance rehearsal L - this suggests that rehearsal is not the only method to get information into LTM in fact it is not even necessary for some things.

Images and files in the map