Editing Long-term memory (section)

==Contradictory evidence==
Some studies have yielded results that contradict the dual-store memory model. Studies showed that in spite of using distractors, there was still both a [[recency effect]] for a list of items<ref>{{cite journal
 | last1=Bjork | first1=R.A.
 | last2=Whitten| first2=W.B.
 | year=1974
 | title=Recency-sensitive retrieval processes in long-term free recall
 | journal=Cognitive Psychology
 | volume=6
 | issue=2
 | pages=173–189
 | doi=10.1016/0010-0285(74)90009-7
| url=https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/22374/1/0000823.pdf| hdl=2027.42/22374
 | hdl-access=free
 }}</ref> and a [[Contiguity (psychology)|contiguity]] effect.<ref>{{cite journal
 | last1=Howard | first1=M.W.
| last2=Kahana| first2=M.J.
 | year=1999
 | title=Contextual variability and serial position effects in free recall
 | journal=Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
 | volume=25
 | issue=4
| pages=923–941
 | doi=10.1037/0278-7393.25.4.923
| pmid=10439501
| citeseerx=10.1.1.360.18
}}</ref>

Another study revealed that how long an item spends in short-term memory is not the key determinant in its strength in long-term memory. Instead, whether the participant actively tries to remember the item while elaborating on its meaning determines the strength of its store in LTM.<ref>{{cite journal
 | last1=Craik | first1=F. I. M.
 | last2=Lockhart| first2=R. S.
 | year=1972
 | title=Levels of processing: A framework for memory research
 | journal=Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior
 | volume=11
 | issue=6
 | pages=671–684
 | doi=10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X
| s2cid=14153362
 }}</ref>