Abstract

The Remember-Know paradigm is commonly used to examine experiential states during recognition. In this paradigm, whether a Know response is defined as a high-confidence state of certainty or a low-confidence state based on familiarity varies across researchers, and differences in definitions and instructions have been shown to influence participants' responding. Using a novel approach, in three internet-based questionnaires participants were placed in the role of 'memory expert' and classified others' justifications of recognition decisions. Results demonstrated that participants reliably differentiated between others' memory experiences--both in terms of confidence and other inherent differences in the justifications. Furthermore, under certain conditions, manipulations of confidence were found to shift how items were assigned to subjective experience categories (Remember, Know, Familiar, and Guess). Findings are discussed in relation to the relationship between subjective experience and confidence, and the separation of Know and Familiar response categories within the Remember-Know paradigm.

Highlights

  • In recognition memory, three type of judgment have been used to examine the processes people use to make their recognition decisions: judgments of confidence, subjective experience, and source

  • Results suggest that subjective experience, source, and confidence judgments can safely accompany one another post-recognition, and subjective experience can go beyond the traditional Remember-Know(-Guess) procedure in simple episodic tasks

  • It is suggested that using a one-step procedure for his first judgment led to the results reported by Martin (2007) and that when recognition decisions and judgments are recorded separately, as in the current study, judgments of source, confidence, and subjective experience, do not influence each other

Read more

Summary

Objectives

Through the current experiments we aim to better understand recognition processes theoretically by comparing the more subjective measures of RK and confidence with the relatively more objective measure of source

Methods
Findings
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.