Revision Library

revisionlibrary.co.uk

A-Level · Psychology

PSY.MEM4 The Working Memory Model: Central Executive to Episodic Buffer

AQA 7182 · Calculators not allowed · about 75 minutes

Total Marks

Name: _______________________________ Date: ____ / ____ / ______

Answer in full sentences for all extended and 6-mark or higher questions. Short 2-4 mark answers may be brief bullet points. Allow approximately 75 minutes for the whole pack.

Describe the central executive as it appears in Baddeley and Hitch's working memory model, naming two of its features. Context: central executive function within the working memory model.

Describe the central executive and give two of its features.

(Total for Question 1 is 3 marks)

Outline the phonological loop in the working memory model and name its two subcomponents. Context: phonological loop function and structure.

Outline the phonological loop and name its two parts.

(Total for Question 2 is 3 marks)

Describe the phonological store and the articulatory process, explaining how they interact to maintain verbal information in working memory. Context: subcomponents of the phonological loop and their interaction.

Describe and explain how the phonological store and articulatory process work together.

(Total for Question 3 is 4 marks)

Explain the visuo-spatial sketchpad and give one example of the type of task that uses it. Context: visuo-spatial sketchpad function within working memory.

Explain the visuo-spatial sketchpad and give one task example.

(Total for Question 4 is 3 marks)

Outline the visual cache and the inner scribe as subcomponents of the visuo-spatial sketchpad, and explain the different kinds of information each holds. Context: structure of the visuo-spatial sketchpad as proposed by Baddeley.

Outline the visual cache and inner scribe and explain their roles.

(Total for Question 5 is 3 marks)

Outline the episodic buffer added by Baddeley in 2000 and explain its purpose in the working memory model. Context: episodic buffer role linking working memory and long-term memory representations.

Outline the episodic buffer and explain why it was added to the model.

(Total for Question 6 is 4 marks)

Describe one piece of experimental evidence from dual-task studies that supports the separation of the phonological loop and visuo-spatial sketchpad. Context: dual-task methodology used to test separate components of working memory.

Describe dual-task evidence supporting separate subsystems.

(Total for Question 7 is 4 marks)

Explain how the KF case study (Shallice and Warrington) provides support for the working memory model. Context: neuropsychological evidence about verbal vs visual STM following brain injury.

Explain how the KF case supports separate STM components.

(Total for Question 8 is 4 marks)

Outline one weakness of the working memory model concerning the central executive, and explain why this is a problem for the model. Context: theoretical limitations of the central executive component.

Outline a weakness about the central executive and explain its implications.

(Total for Question 9 is 4 marks)

Application: A student, Erin, is revising while listening to a podcast. She tries to copy a complex diagram by looking at the page and drawing it, while simultaneously repeating aloud a list of seven words to herself to memorise them. Identify which components of the working memory model Erin is using for each task she performs, and explain your choices. Context: applied dual-task scenario requiring AO2 identification of subsystems.

Identify which working memory components Erin uses for each activity and explain.

(Total for Question 10 is 6 marks)

Identify one limitation of using neuropsychological case studies, such as KF, to support the working memory model, and suggest one way researchers can address this limitation. Context: methodological evaluation of case-study evidence.

Identify a limitation of case-study evidence and suggest how to address it.

(Total for Question 11 is 4 marks)

Discuss the working memory model. In your answer, evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the model, and refer to empirical evidence such as dual-task studies and the KF case study. Context: extended evaluative essay on the WMM, both supporting and critical evidence required.

Discuss and evaluate the working memory model.

(Total for Question 12 is 16 marks)

Mark scheme · PSY.MEM4 The Working Memory Model: Central Executive to Episodic Buffer

Question 1

M1 identifies the central executive as an attentional controller that coordinates the other components of working memory oe
B1 states it has limited capacity oe
B1 states it is modality-free, able to process different types of information oe
Answer: The central executive is an attentional controller that allocates processing to the sub-systems; it has a limited capacity and is modality-free, able to process visual and verbal information.

Question 2

M1 states the phonological loop deals with verbal and acoustic information oe
B1 names the phonological store (inner ear) as one subcomponent oe
B1 names the articulatory process (inner voice) as the other subcomponent oe
Answer: The phonological loop handles verbal and acoustic information and is split into the phonological store, which holds speech-based information briefly, and the articulatory process, which allows rehearsal.

Question 3

M1 describes the phonological store as holding speech-based sounds for a short time, coded acoustically oe
M1 describes the articulatory process as a rehearsal mechanism that refreshes items in the phonological store oe
A1 explains that the articulatory process subvocally rehearses words so they are kept active in the phonological store oe
A1 explains this interaction prevents decay of verbal information for a few seconds unless rehearsal is disrupted oe
Answer: The phonological store briefly holds speech-based sounds coded acoustically. The articulatory process rehearses items subvocally and refreshes the phonological store, preventing verbal information from decaying for a short period.

Question 4

M1 states the visuo-spatial sketchpad stores visual and spatial information oe
B1 mentions it has limited capacity and helps with manipulation of visual images oe
B1 gives an example task, e.g. mentally rotating an object or navigating a route oe
Answer: The visuo-spatial sketchpad stores and manipulates visual and spatial information with limited capacity; for example, it is used when mentally rotating an object or planning a route.

Question 5

M1 states the visual cache stores visual form and colour information oe
B1 states the inner scribe stores spatial relationships and records movements oe
B1 explains that the inner scribe also transfers information to the central executive for manipulation oe
Answer: The visual cache stores visual form and colour information, while the inner scribe handles spatial relationships and movement information and can transfer spatial information to the central executive for manipulation.

Question 6

M1 states the episodic buffer is a temporary, limited-capacity store that integrates information from the other sub-systems oe
M1 states it is capable of holding multi-modal chunks or episodes and is linked to long-term memory oe
A1 explains it was added to provide a general store that could hold integrated information and account for findings that the phonological loop and visuo-spatial sketchpad alone could not explain oe
A1 explains that it helps explain how information from different modalities can be bound into a single episodic representation oe
Answer: The episodic buffer is a temporary limited-capacity store that integrates information from the phonological loop, visuo-spatial sketchpad and long-term memory into multi-modal episodes. It was added to explain how different types of information can be bound together and to act as a general store linking working memory and long-term memory.

Question 7

M1 describes a dual-task finding, e.g. participants can carry out a visual task and a verbal task simultaneously with little interference oe
M1 refers to Baddeley et al. type studies showing tasks using different subsystems interfere less than tasks using the same subsystem oe
A1 explains this supports separate stores because if STM were a single unitary store, performing two tasks should cause equivalent interference oe
A1 provides an example, e.g. tracking a moving light while rehearsing words produces less interference than doing two verbal tasks simultaneously oe
Answer: Dual-task studies show that participants can perform a visual tracking task and a verbal rehearsal task at the same time with relatively little interference, whereas two verbal tasks interfere strongly with each other. Baddeley and colleagues used such findings to argue for separate stores, because a unitary short-term memory would predict equal interference across tasks.

Question 8

M1 identifies the key finding: KF had impaired verbal short-term memory but relatively intact visual short-term memory oe
M1 states this suggests separate verbal and visual stores rather than a single STM store oe
A1 explains that KF's pattern is consistent with the phonological loop being damaged while the visuo-spatial sketchpad remained functional oe
A1 links this to the working memory model claim that STM comprises multiple specialised components, supporting the model's fractionation of STM oe
Answer: KF suffered impaired verbal STM but preserved visual STM, suggesting that verbal and visual information are processed by separate STM subsystems. This pattern is consistent with damage to the phonological loop while the visuo-spatial sketchpad remained intact, supporting the working memory model's proposal of multiple specialised components.

Question 9

M1 states a recognised weakness, e.g. the central executive is described vaguely and lacks detailed explanatory mechanisms oe
M1 explains that this vagueness makes it difficult to test or to specify distinct processes within the central executive oe
A1 explains why this matters: without a clear specification, the central executive can be a catch-all for unexplained findings, reducing the model's scientific precision oe
A1 may give an example such as inconsistent operationalisations in experiments trying to measure central executive function oe
Answer: A key weakness is that the central executive is vaguely specified and lacks clear internal structure. This vagueness makes it hard to operationalise and test experimentally, so the central executive risks becoming a catch-all explanation for any attentional control effect the model cannot otherwise explain, reducing the model's precision and falsifiability.

Question 10

M1 identifies the visuo-spatial sketchpad for copying the complex diagram oe
A1 justifies that copying a diagram requires visual and spatial processing, which is the visuo-spatial sketchpad's function oe
M1 identifies the phonological loop for repeating the list of seven words aloud oe
A1 justifies that repeating words subvocally or aloud uses the articulatory process and phonological store oe
M1 identifies that listening to a podcast may also engage the phonological loop or the episodic buffer depending on whether Erin is processing meaning oe
A1 explains that if she is processing the podcast's meaning it may involve the episodic buffer integrating verbal input with other information, but if just passively hearing words it is mainly phonological loop processing oe
Answer: Copying the diagram uses the visuo-spatial sketchpad because it requires visual and spatial processing. Repeating the list aloud uses the phonological loop, specifically the articulatory process and phonological store. Listening to the podcast could engage the phonological loop for surface acoustic processing, and if Erin integrates the podcast meaning with her notes it may recruit the episodic buffer.

Question 11

M1 identifies a limitation, e.g. case studies have low generalisability because they involve a single or small number of unusual patients oe
M1 explains why this matters, e.g. patterns seen in one patient may not represent typical cognitive architecture oe
A1 suggests a way to address it, e.g. replicate findings across multiple patients or use controlled experimental groups and neuroimaging to corroborate findings oe
A1 explains how this helps, e.g. larger or converging-sources studies improve confidence that the dissociation reflects general cognitive processes rather than idiosyncratic damage oe
Answer: A limitation is low generalisability: a single case like KF may not represent typical cognitive processing. Researchers can address this by replicating patterns across multiple patients and combining case-study data with controlled experiments and neuroimaging, which increases confidence that observed dissociations reflect general cognitive mechanisms.

Question 12

Level 4 (13-16): Knowledge of the working memory model is accurate and detailed. Evaluation is thorough, balanced and well developed, using relevant empirical evidence interactively to support both strengths and weaknesses. Arguments are clearly focused and coherent, with appropriate use of specialist terminology and effective application of evidence such as dual-task studies and KF.
Level 3 (9-12): Knowledge is generally accurate with some detail. Evaluation is present and mostly balanced, referencing appropriate evidence, though some points may be less developed. Reasoning is generally clear with relevant terminology used.
Level 2 (5-8): Knowledge is present but limited or partially inaccurate. Evaluation is superficial or one-sided, with limited use of empirical evidence. Answers may lack clear organisation and specialist terminology may be used inconsistently.
Level 1 (1-4): Very limited knowledge and evaluation. Little relevant evidence or reasoning. Answer may be disjointed and lacks coherent structure and terminology.
Level 0 (0): No creditable content.
Indicative content:
- AO1: Outline of the model, including the central executive as an attentional controller, the phonological loop (phonological store and articulatory process), the visuo-spatial sketchpad (visual cache and inner scribe) and the episodic buffer added in 2000.
- AO1: Description of coding and capacity where relevant, for example acoustic coding in the phonological loop and limited capacity of each component.
- AO3 Strength: Dual-task studies show less interference when tasks use different subsystems, supporting separate components of working memory; example reference to Baddeley et al. style findings.
- AO3 Strength: Neuropsychological evidence such as KF, who had impaired verbal STM but intact visual STM, supports the fractionation of STM into specialised stores rather than a unitary store.
- AO3 Weakness: The central executive is underspecified and lacks clear internal structure, making it difficult to operationalise experimentally and risking being a catch-all explanation.
- AO3 Weakness: Heavy reliance on case studies and small-sample neuropsychological evidence limits generalisability; single-patient dissociations may reflect idiosyncratic damage.
- AO3 Further critique: Some later research questions aspects of the visuo-spatial sketchpad subdivisions and the exact capacity of the episodic buffer, and alternative models argue for more distributed or embedded processes.
- AO3 Strength: The model has clear real-world applications, for example understanding how multitasking affects learning and informing strategies for instruction and revision, which matters because it translates theory into practice.
- AO3 Evaluation balance: Consideration that converging methods, including experiments, neuroimaging and case studies, provide stronger support than any single method alone; implications for the model's continuing refinement.

The Working Memory Model: Central Executive to Episodic Buffer - Worksheets, Questions and Revision