Is the Classic Model of Memory Accurate?
Jonathan Firth's Memory & Metacognition Updates #68
Hello! This week, let’s get back to memory…
You may be at least somewhat familiar with a model of memory that looks like this:
Sometimes known as the modal model, it shows three main memory stores, including a very brief store linked to the senses, then the more familiar working memory and long-term memory.
And is it accurate? Well, it does have some good points:
The model summarises the durations of the stores pretty well (in bold at the bottom of the image – yes, working memory does fade in under a minute!)
Most people would agree that working memory and long-term memory are separate.
It’s clear that attention is important for things to get into a learner’s working memory in the first place.
However, the model is limited in many ways, too:
It doesn’t account for spacing or prior learning – both of which are really important when taking in new information!
It doesn’t take account of meaning (for example, making meaningful connections with to-be-remembered items).
It portrays retrieval from LTM as accessing a stored file; in fact, retrieval also boosts the strength of a stored item.
In short, the model provides a broad architecture of memory, but due to certain key oversimplifications, educators would be best advised not to draw too strongly on it.
To delve into just one example a little more: researchers quickly established that there are better ways of getting items into LTM than rote rehearsal in WM (which the model presents as the main way to do so).
One of the most-discussed alternatives is elaboration. This is where a learner makes meaningful connections between new information and what they already know, as indicated in the image below.
In a study by Bartsch et al. (2018), researchers compared refreshing (i.e. focusing on information in WM just after it disappeared) and elaborating (i.e. making meaningful links with existing knowledge).
They found that refreshing helped things to be retained in WM, but not in LTM. For elaborating, this finding was reversed – it didn’t help WM, but it did help with lasting retention in LTM. Link below:
Bartsch, L. M., Singmann, H., & Oberauer, K. (2018). The effects of refreshing and elaboration on working memory performance, and their contributions to long-term memory formation. Memory & Cognition, 46, 796–808.
This study helps to show how processing information in WM is not enough – it needs to be meaningfully linked to existing knowledge.
I say more about the pros and cons of the modal model in What Teachers Need to Know about Memory. And I’ll explain one other key issue with the model next time.
Hope you have a great week!
Jonathan
Last week: Motivation Applied – What Drives Your Professional Learning?
Please note that my slides and similar materials are used under a CC BY-NC 4.0 license. This means you can use or adapt them with attribution for non-commercial purposes. If you wish to use my materials for other purposes, feel free to get in touch.