Editing Atkinson–Shiffrin memory model (section)

==Criticism==

===Sensory register as a separate store===
One of the early and central criticisms to the Atkinson–Shiffrin model was the inclusion of the sensory registers as part of memory. Specifically, the original model seemed to describe the sensory registers as both a structure and a control process. Parsimony would suggest that if the sensory registers are actually control processes, there is no need for a tri-partite system.  Later revisions to the model addressed these claims and incorporated the sensory registers with the short-term store.<ref name=AtkinsonShiffrin1971 /><ref name=Shiffrin1975 /><ref name=Shiffrin1976 />

===Division and nature of working memory===
Baddeley and Hitch have in turn called into question the specific structure of the short-term store, proposing that it is subdivided into multiple components.<ref name=BaddeleyHitch1974 /> While the different components were not specifically addressed in the original Atkinson-Shiffrin model, the authors do note that little research has been done investigating the different ways sensory modalities may be represented in the short-term store.<ref name=AtkinsonShiffrin1968 /> Thus the model of working memory given by Baddeley and Hitch should be viewed as a refinement of the original model.
:{{further|Baddeley's model of working memory}}

===Rehearsal as the sole transfer mechanism===
The model has been further criticized as suggesting that rehearsal is the key process that initiates and facilitates transfer of information into LTM. There is very little evidence supporting this hypothesis, and long-term recall can in fact be better predicted by a [[Levels-of-processing effect|levels-of-processing framework]]. In this framework, items which are encoded at a deeper, more semantic level are shown to have stronger traces in long-term memory.<ref name=CraikLockhart1972 /> This criticism is somewhat unfounded as Atkinson and Shiffrin clearly state a difference between rehearsal and coding, where coding is akin to elaborative processes which levels-of-processing would call deep-processing.<ref name=AtkinsonShiffrin1968 /> In this light, the levels-of-processing framework could be seen as more of an extension of the Atkinson-Shiffrin model rather than a refutation.<ref name=Raaijmakers1993 />
:{{further|Levels-of-processing effect}}

===Division of long-term memory===
In the case of long-term memory it is unlikely that different types of information, such as the motor skills to ride a bike, memory for vocabulary, and memory for personal life events are stored in the same fashion. [[Endel Tulving]] notes the importance of encoding specificity in long-term memory.  To clarify, there are definite differences in the way information is stored depending on whether it is episodic (memories of events), procedural (knowledge of how to do things), or semantic (general knowledge).<ref name=TulvingThompson1973 /> A short (non-inclusive) example comes from the study of [[Henry Molaison]] (H.M.): learning a simple motor task (tracing a star pattern in a mirror), which involves implicit and procedural long-term storage, is unaffected by bilateral lesioning of the hippocampal regions while other forms of long-term memory, like vocabulary learning (semantic) and memories for events, are severely impaired.<ref name=Milner1962 />
:{{further|Encoding specificity principle}}

===Further reading===
For more thorough and technical reviews of the main criticisms please refer to the following resources:

*{{cite book |first=Jeroen G. W. |last=Raaijmakers |chapter=The story of the two-store model of memory: past criticisms, current status, and future directions |title=Attention and performance |volume=XIV (silver jubilee volume) |pages=[https://archive.org/details/attentionperform0000atte_x7w3/page/467 467–488] |publisher=MIT Press |location=Cambridge, MA |year=1993 |isbn=978-0-262-13284-8 |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/attentionperform0000atte_x7w3/page/467 }}
* {{cite journal |last=Baddeley |first=Alan |title=The magical number seven: still magic after all these years? |journal=Psychological Review |volume=101 |issue=2 |pages=353–356 |date=April 1994 |pmid=8022967 |doi= 10.1037/0033-295X.101.2.353}}