Criticism of Multi Store and Level of Processing Models in Memory Research

This article discusses the criticism of multi store memory model and level of processing model in memory research. It covers the strengths and weaknesses of both models and how they have been tested through various experiments. The article also discusses the topic of eyewitness testimony of memory research and how it can be influenced by external factors.

MEMORY
1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
MAIN BODY...................................................................................................................................3
Criticism of multi store memory model.......................................................................................3
Criticism of Level of processing model.......................................................................................5
Eyewitness testimony (EWT) of memory research.....................................................................6
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................6
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................7

INTRODUCTION
Cognitive approach refers to the mental activity that outlines the thinking, remembering,
learning and other (Taranto and et.al 2019). Cognitive psychological generally believes that
mediational process developed in between the stimulus and response, meditational can be
memory, perception. Cognitive process mainly arranges and processed the information which the
one receives, generally people does not passively respond to their surroundings (Toth, Sambeth
and Blokland, 2022). As human’s acts as a computer processor as bran receives the information
and then interpret and respond to it just like computer does. Multi store memory model suggested
that there are three individual memory storage where the information is change in between this
storage in the linear sequence. Whereas level of processing model which focuses on depth of the
processing which is included in the memory, as the information is processed more longer than it
gives the stronger memory.
MAIN BODY
Criticism of multi store memory model
MSM is proposed by the shiffin and Atkinson they suggested this model is the description
of the memory where they stated that there is sensory memory (SM), short term (STM) and long
term memory (LTM) stores (Kazemi and et.al 2021). Where each of this three memory stores
functions differently, they differ in the approach when the information is being encoded also
differs in the capacity for memory storage and for duration as how long information will stay
within mind. This model is generally being criticised for emphasising too much on the rehearsal
role. This model is over simplified which generally believes that every stores which are SM,
STM and LTM works independently also this model not describes the memory distortion. Model
also neglected the individual difference fact as every human differs in their aspect but this model
emphasises that every individual have the same memory functions (Xu, Ota and Dong, 2018). It
has become the evidence now which states that both LTM and STM are complex, for an instance
working model that is suggested by the Baddeley and Hitch (1974) stated that short term
memory is not only remain to the unitary store but it also encompasses the different elements that
are visuospatial and central executive. Regarding LTM where the information like remembering
3

how to lay out the task, to play the video games all stored within the long term memory store. As
in such rehearsal is taken as the simplest description for transforming the information from short
term memory to the long term memory, as this model avoids the elements like motivation,
affects, mnemonics that underpins the learning process. HM patient’s case study supported the
MSM, he was not able to processes the new LTM after underwent through surgery where his
hippocampus was take out but his STM was not affected.
However, there are good research presents which supports the idea of MSM model in
regards with the LTM and STM, for an example case study of the KF patient whose brain was
damaged, as patient’s STM was impaired because of the motorbike accident, but his LTM was
remained undamaged (Fan and et.al 201). Thus from this case scenario it is found that memories
inside the LTM are processed semantically such as one can easily recall the message that put
across the political speech instead all words as they heard. Terry (2005) did an experiment to
assess the serial position effect and to represent the limited capacity and duration of the short
term memory. Where the two procedures have been carried out in procedure one terry used the
repeated measure process with the students, in this there are two variables which are independent
for recalling the participants and other dependent variable was consists of the brands numbers
which the students can recall from what they see (Baddeley Hitch and Allen, 2019). In procedure
2 participants are enables to see the 15 adverts which were about 30 seconds long before
recalling it promptly, then participants watched the 15 adverts of second group and completed
the distraction task and then allowed to recall the brand names. Result of both procedure is
suggested the primary effect in this first things of the list is easily remembered because it is
present in the LTM, while in recency effect some final things also remembered well as they are
Kept within the STM. Thus prompt recall represents the both primary and recency effect because
of the short time period between the recall and rehearsal. Thus KF’s case study criticises the
MSM model as patient’s STM was unpaired after brain damage so KF is able to store the LTM
without them requiring to pass it from the damaged LTM. It criticises in two manners which are-
As per the MSM memories need to pass it through the STM to keep in LTM, but in case of KF
this fact contradicts as his STM was undamaged which means STM is not a unitary store. Thus
there are more case studies regarding brain damage is not generalised, where the criticism within
scientific is not found.

Criticism of Level of processing model
LOP model by the (Craik & lockhart, 1972) concentrated in depth of processing that include
in the memory, that leads in predicting the depth information which is encoded where the
memory is longer then it trace will remain last, unlike the MSM which is generally a
unstructured process. In this strength of the trace rely on amount of attention which is paid to the
stimulus, in depth processing is bring out. In this generally covers the shallow and deep
processing where in shallow structural processing refer as to processed only physical aspects of
anything like how words looks, thus it only includes the maintenance rehearsal and proceeds to
STM remembrance of the information (Craik, Eftekhari and Binns,2018). While in Deep
processing, semantic encoding is there where the processing of the word is found and it relates to
the other words which have same meaning. Thus Deep processing supports the elaboration
rehearsal that covers the meaningful analysis such as images, thinking. Thus LOP suggested the
ideas the information is processed also have the impact as how well it is learned, if there is depth
in LOP then the information can easily be recalled (Wati and Wulansar, 2021).
Tulving (1972) stated that the memory research is beneficial from analysing the difference
between the episodic and semantic memory, tulving said that episodic memory generally defines
as the temporary knowledge about the events and he noted that such memory stores in form of
autobiographical which is related to existing element of episodic memory. While semantic
memory refers to the memory that is essential for utilisation of language (Rico-Gallego and et.al
2019). Experiment by the craik and tulving where the participants were provided with 60 words
series for that they have to answer for three queries. Some of the questions demands the
participants to encode the words in depth manner (semantic) and other to encode in shallow
manner- as structural processing “question is like word is in capital letter or in small letter” and
in auditory processing “questions were like “do the words are rhyming” and in semantic
approach “Did the words are related to this sentence”. Thus in experiment it is found that
participants have mixed the original words, in result they are asked to recall the words which
were semantically encoded as compared to the auditory and structural processing. Thus schemata
help in making the sense in words by giving the short breaks to analyse the things. According to
the (Baddeley, 1978) there is no such way for measuring the depth as what things are encoded,
this LOP theory is untestable, yet there is some assumption of the cognitive approach which
states that processes can be easily tested scientifically (Rhie, Lim and Yun, 2018).
5

Eyewitness testimony (EWT) of memory research
Eyewitness testimony generally refer to the facts that what things will be happen when
people witness any situation that can be crime, accident, legal event. For an example people are
required to give the explanation during court trial about any crime or accident. According to the
Elizabeth loftus (Loftus, 2019) it states that EWT memory is generally not accurate in
surprisingly manner. She suggested that repressed memories does not relate to the actual scene
memory, but instead the ideas which are formed from compound of awaking and dreaming case.
From her experiment it is found that memory about any event which is been witnesses is greatly
flexible. If someone is gaining the information during the meantime between to witness the scene
and recalling it, then this new information has influence on what the person recalls (Spearing and
Wade2021). She also claims about the false memory which is that when one person generally
told the information in wrong way as to misinterpret it then it ultimately affects the listeners
memory who listening to the person who is feeding the wrong information about the experience.
CONCLUSION
From the above research it is concluded that memory research has been beneficial that
provides the good range of application in the scientific manner which enables to deduce the
cause and effects. Computer analogy is somehow beneficial but avoids the human emotion.
Following illustrated the criticism of the multi store memory model and level of processing
model, it also discussed the eye witness testimony application of the memory research.
REFERENCES
Books and journals

Baddeley, A.D., Hitch, G.J. and Allen, R.J., 2019. From short-term store to multicomponent
working memory: The role of the modal model. Memory & cognition. 47(4). pp.575-588.
Craik, F.I., Eftekhari, E. and Binns, M.A., 2018. Effects of divided attention at encoding and
retrieval: Further data. Memory & cognition. 46(8). pp.1263-1277.
Fan, C. and et.al 2019. Heterogeneous memory enhanced multimodal attention model for video
question answering. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and
pattern recognition (pp. 1999-2007).
Kazemi, A. and et.al 2021, July. A flash-based multi-bit content-addressable memory with
euclidean squared distance. In 2021 IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Low Power
Electronics and Design (ISLPED) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
Loftus, E.F., 2019. Eyewitness testimony. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 33(4), pp.498-503.
Rhie, Y.L., Lim, J.H. and Yun, M.H., 2018. Queueing network based driver model for varying
levels of information processing. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems. 49(6).
pp.508-517.
Rico-Gallego, J.A. and et.al 2019. A survey of communication performance models for high-
performance computing. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR). 51(6). pp.1-36.
Spearing, E.R. and Wade, K.A., 2021. Providing Eyewitness Confidence Judgments During
Versus After Eyewitness Interviews Does Not Affect the Confidence-Accuracy
Relationship. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition.
Taranto, P. and et.al 2019. Structure of quantum stochastic processes with finite Markov
order. Physical Review A. 99(4). p.042108.
Toth, M., Sambeth, A. and Blokland, A., 2022. The antimuscarinic agent biperiden selectively
impairs recognition of abstract figures without affecting the processing of non‐
words. Human Psychopharmacology: Clinical and Experimental. 37(2). p.e2819.
Wati, E.K. and Wulansari, W., 2021. LOP Game Development to Improve Early Childhood
Mathematical-Logic Learning Ability. Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia. 10(1). pp.68-78.
Xu, J., Ota, K. and Dong, M., 2018. Saving energy on the edge: In-memory caching for multi-
tier heterogeneous networks. IEEE Communications Magazine. 56(5). pp.102-107.
7