Psychology Questions

————————————————- Outline and evaluate the multi-store model? The multi-store model is a model of memory that has the advantage of being able to be broken down into sub-models of memory. According to the multi-store model of memory (Atkinson & Shiffrin, 1968) memory can be explained in terms of 3 stores (sensory store, short term store and long term store) and 2 processes (attention and rehearsal). Sensory Memory stores the incoming information from the senses.

The model assumes that these are modality specific that is there is a separate store for each of the five senses. The store is very brief and the vast majority of information is lost here. Only information that is relevant or important is attended to and passed on to STM. STM Atkinson & Shiffrin believed the store to be fragile and retains information for about 30 seconds. Compare this to the 18 seconds of the Brown–Peterson technique. Material that is rehearsed is passed on to LTM. LTM can store this information for a lifetime. Forgetting from LTM is by decay or interference.

Attention: needed to transfer information from the senses to STM. Most stimuli that reach the senses are ignored because they aren’t seen as important. Only relevant or interesting information or material that we choose to concentrate on is passed to the STM. 99% is lost at this stage. Rehearsal: needed to transfer information from STM to LTM. We can rehearse information out loud as a child would do or we can rehearse sub-vocally, in our heads. Either way it is seen as crucial and is one of the main criticisms of the theory, as we shall see.

Later models distinguished between maintenance rehearsal in which material is repeated in ‘rote’ fashion to maintain it in STM and help with transfer to LTM. Elaborative rehearsal links the information with existing material or elaborates it in some other way, again as an aid to longer term storage. To evaluate, the model has simplistic appeal and has been influential in stimulating research. Other models such as the ‘working memory model’ take the multi-store model as starting point and then add to it.

Much of the supporting evidence for the multi-store model comes from artificial, laboratory studies which might not reflect how memory works in real life. Therefore memory research data have accumulated that traditional multi store models simply cannot explain. Researchers have, therefore looked to new models in order to explain memory more fully. ————————————————- Outline and evaluate the effects working memory model? Alan Baddeley and Graham Hitch proposed a model of working memory in 1974, in an attempt to describe a more accurate model of short-term memory.

Baddeley & Hitch proposed their tripartite working memory model as an alternative to the short-term store in Atkinson & Shiffrin’s ‘multi-store’ memory model. The model consist of three main components; the central executive, the phonological loop and the visuo-spatial sketchpad. The central executive has limited capacity but can process information from any sensory system. It has responsibility and controls for a range of important control processes, which include setting task goals, monitoring and correcting errors etc… Moreover this core component is supported by two slave systems, which can be used as storage systems.

Therefore the slave systems have separate responsibilities and work independently of one another. The phonological loop, is a limited capacity, temporary storage systems for holding verbal information in a speech based form. The visuo-spatial sketchpad is a limited capacity temporary memory system for holding visual and spatial information. To evaluate, although the working memory model has been applied to various real life settings. However the working memory model does not offer a complete understanding of how memory works.

For example the exact role for the central executive remains unclear and other researchers have also questioned whether there are separate verbal and spatial working memory models systems. Baddeley (2001) added the episodic buffer making the model more complex. This suggests again that the model is not complete and may need still further revision as more evidence is uncovered. Overall the model has proved to be influential and has stimulated lots of research. It is still being developed and expanded. ————————————————-

Outline and evaluate the effects on day care on peer aggression? Day care is a form of temporary care not given by a family member or someone known to the child. It usually takes place outside of the family. There are many forms of day care but the most common ones are nursery and child-minders. Some research has shown that day care has negative effects on the social development of infants, however most importantly several factors have been identified as factors which will affect the effects day care has on an infant. These factors are the quality of care and the number of hours the child spends in day care.

Vandell and Corasaniti (1990) found that eight year olds who had spent their early years in day care were rated as more ‘non-compliant’ by both their teachers and their parents. A number of studies e. g. Belsky (1999) have tended to support this finding that long periods of day care in the first five years can lead to raised levels of aggressive behaviour in later childhood. Haskins (1985) found that children kept in larger groups were more likely to be aggressive. Clarke-Stewart (again) argue that much of the research into aggression (e. g. Vandell and Corasaniti) fail to distinguish non-compliance from assertiveness from aggression.

What are being reported as more aggressive behaviour in the day care children could simply be children that have greater confidence and have learned to assert themselves better and to control their feelings and emotions. To evaluate, day care can be seen as a potentially stressful experience and poor quality care can be associated with less positive social outcomes such as increase aggression. Oreover it can be difficult to assess the effects o day care due to the variety of settings and individual differences in children’s attachments to their parents.