ferers only remember new information for no longer than the normal short term memory span (i.e. 30 seconds) e.g. Baddeley (1990) case of Clive Wearing. The evidence described above suggests three quite distinct stores, the theories of memory all provide information about how memory is structured and organised, e.g. Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968)- the multistore model, based on empirical evidence and from which many subsequent theories were derived e.g. the working memory model, Baddeley and Hitch (1974). In most cases in association with the research studies. Therefore in regard to the question being addressed the need for memory to be explained in terms of a set of stages rather than a single process stems from the evidence provided from the empirical studies. It is apparent from these studies that there are three quite separate stores, this can not be disputed, however there are certain areas in the research that do not appear to be fully explained. For example, is it totally possible that the long term memory has an unlimited capacity, surely the information which is not readily accessible or available simply has not been stored in the first place and therefore this discredits trace decay and many forgetting studies, which in turn may discredit evidence for supporting the existence of memory as separate stages. Also in discussing the need for memory to be described as a set of stages rather than a single process, it is not necessary to concentrate on the particular theories which have been derived from the evidence available. This is relevant because the theories do not actually prove that memory is not a single process but are instead presenting a possible explanation of how the memory system operates based upon the available findings. However, the research that followed some of the theories does provide further explanation in order to make sense of the experimental data from previous studies. Tulving (1972) further modified the divi...
