outline and evaluate the working memory model

5 main PEELS

-central executive lacks clarity -case study of KF -physical evidence to show the central executive exists -support from Baddeley's word length effect experiment -dual task performance

A strength of the working memory model is that there is physical evidence to show that the central executive exists...

For example, Braver gave participants some reasoning tasks while they were undergoing a PET scan. The results of this scan highlighted that the prefrontal cortex was experiencing the highest amount of activity and being used the most. Therefore, this supports the theory that the central executive does exist, both in the model and physically in the brain, and that it is used for reasoning tasks. This supports psychology as a science due to its scientific nature.

The case study of KF supports the Working Memory Model (WMM) in showing the WMM have different components...

KF had a motorcycle accident and suffered from a brain injury which damaged his short-term memory. KF had impairment mainly for verbal information and his memory for visual information was unaffected. This supports the WMM as it shows the STM is not just a unitary store but has separate components for visual information and verbal information as his visuo-sketchpad was intact, but his phonological loop was damaged. Therefore, the KF case study supports the WMM as it shows the STM is not a unitary store.

The main reason for developing the WMM was to account for dual task performance. Hitch and Baddeley (1976) supported the existence of the central executive in one such study...

Task one was to perform a reasoning task whilst simultaneously saying 'the' repeatedly. Task two was to perform a reasoning task whilst reciting aloud a list of random digits. Task 1 was slower as task 2 involved the central executive and the articulatory loop. This demonstrates the dual task performance effect and shows that the central executive is one of the components of working memory.

A Strength of the WWM is that it has support from Baddeley's word length effect experiment...

The participants found it harder to remember the longer words that they were given such as 'association' compared to shorter words such as 'twice'. This is because the longer words can't be rehearsed in the phonological loop as they don't fit. However, this word length effect disappeared when the participant was given an articulatory suppression task. They were asked to perform the reasoning task whilst saying 'the' repeatedly. This repetitive task prevents rehearsal and creates articulatory suppression meaning that they could not rehearse the shorter words more quickly than the longer words. Overall, this is evidence for the articulatory process and the phonological loop, which are both key parts of the WMM.

AO1

The working memory model focuses on the active nature of the short term memory. The stm has been replaced by the working memory. The WMM consists of the visuospatial sketchpad, the central executive and the phonological loop. The WMM applies to real life tasks. The phonological loop is associated with reading, the central executive is associated with problem solving and the visuospatial sketchpad is associated with navigation. The central executive coordinates the phonological loop and the visuospatial sketchpad. The phonological loop consists of the phonological store that holds auditory memories for a few seconds and the articulatory rehearsal process with temporarily retains language based info. The episodic buffer was added by Baddeley in 2000 which allows the subsystems to interact. It is a temporary store of information.

The central executive lacks clarity and critics say it is too vague...

They feel as though the notion of a single central executive is wrong and that there are probably several components. Eslinger and Damasio (1985) studied EVR, who had a cerebral tumour removed. He performed well on tests requiring reasoning , which suggested his central executive was intact. However, he had poor decision making skills which suggested that his central executive was actually not intact. The central executive is responsible for both of these skills. This means the account offered of the central executive is unsatisfactory as it fails to explain everything as it is possibly more complex than currently represented.