Compare and contrast two theories of memory. 

Memory is defined as the process of maintaining information overtime (Matlin 2003), and the means in which we draw on our past experiences to use this information in the present (Stenberg 1999). The aim of this essay is to compare and contrast the Working Memory Model (WMM) and the Multistore Memory Model (MSM). Theories such as these, provide significant framework for understanding how information is processed, stored, and retrieved. Evaluating the similarities and differences between these models will contribute to a deeper understanding of human cognition and memory processes. Memory is highly significant as without any recollection of past experiences, we would simply be succumbed to slaves of the moment. “We are inherently completely dependent on memory as a person’s memory is at least the most important thing in life and without memory civilization would cease to exist” (an extract from Blakemore’s theory on memory).

The WSM, proposed by Atkinson and Shiffrin in 1968, is a crucial cognitive psychology theory that outlines the processing and storage of information in the memory system. It consists of three main memory stores, sensory memory, short-term memory, and long-term memory. Stimulus enters the sensory store first, and is held very briefly, for a fraction of a second, before then being encoded into the short-term store, from this the information in the short-term store will either be forgotten or transferred to the long-term memory for permanent storage. 
Furthermore, Graham and Alan introduced the WMM in 1974, a theory that explains the temporary storage and manipulation of stimuli in the human mind. The model consists of a central board, a phonological circuit, and a visuospatial sketchpad. The phonological loop processes phonological stimuli, while the visuospatial sketchpad processes visual and spatial stimuli. The use of separate slave systems explains how people can perform two tasks simultaneously, and accounts for patients with reduced digit span but normal visual short-term memory. This model has become widely accepted in cognitive psychology.

Moreover, the WMM and the MSM have several strengths and weaknesses between them. For example, one of the working memory model's strengths is that it provides a distinct explanation for parallel processing, in which cognitive tasks are completed concurrently. The MSM thesis in that distinct short-term stores regulate short-term visual and phonological memories is further supported by a case study by KF. One of the weaknesses regarding the concept of ecology is that it has been criticised for being overly simplistic and ambiguous. (www.tutor2u.net/psychology). Additionally, the results of laboratory tests may not have high ecological validity because tasks like repeating "XYZ" might not be realistic of everyday activities. Further, a significant strength of the working memory model is that it has been significant in post research regarding memory, which provides a testable basis for further studies. Also, the model's principles are widely agreed upon, and lab studies provide reliable evidence, making it more valid and replicable. With that said there are some weaknesses that have been pointed out by some scholars, whereby they have stated that the memory store is too intrinsic to be adequately explained in a single theory. Both theories share similar advantages and disadvantages. Similarly, both models acknowledge the presence of a limited capacity for information processing and storage. They also each propose that memory is not a single system but rather a complex process involving different components. Furthermore, both models emphasize the importance of rehearsal in the memory process. Lastly, both models suggest that information can be lost from memory if not properly encoded or rehearsed. In contrast to this, although the two theories share components, they also differ from one another. For example, the multistore model states that the short-term memory is a single store, whereas the working memory model, suggests that the short-term memory has three components. Moreover, the multistore model says that memory loss is due to decay, while the working memory model does not agree with this notion.

To conclude, discussing these two models of memory has given an insightful and greater understanding into the processes that explain how the human memory works. Comparing and contrasting whilst also discussing the similarities and differences between these models have contribute to a deeper understanding of human cognition and memory processes. Although the MSM and WMM differ in some respects they also share a fundamental understanding of the foundational nature of memory, supported by empirical research. While MSM proposes a linear progression of information through separate stores, WMM emphasizes active processing and manipulation. Both models demonstrate the complexity and richness of human memory processes.