Judgment of frequency versus recognition confidence: repetition and recursive reminding.

Douglas L Hintzman
Author Information
  1. Douglas L Hintzman: Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403, USA. hintzman@oregon.uoregon.edu

Abstract

Judgments of presentation frequency (JOFs) were compared with recognition confidence ratings (RCRs) in a single memory experiment. Two differences were found: (1) Relative to the effect of exposure duration, frequency had a larger effect on JOF than it had on RCR. (2) Replicating a finding by Proctor (1977), normalized memory operating characteristic (zMOC) curves for JOF had slopes greater than 1.0, whereas those for RCR had slopes of less than 1.0. The slope difference was found to be attributable to the first study trial. The results are contrary to the hypothesis that a single strength or familiarity dimension underlies JOF and RCR. To explain both findings, a new hypothetical basis of JOF is proposed. Repetition is assumed to trigger study phase reminding, which, in turn, is encoded into memory. Remindings can be recursively embedded, and the depth of recursion, recollected at test, is the primary basis of JOF. The hypothesis appears consistent with a broad range of JOF findings.

References

  1. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1990 Jan;16(1):5-16 [PMID: 2136752]
  2. Mem Cognit. 1983 Nov;11(6):609-15 [PMID: 6669029]
  3. Psychon Bull Rev. 1994 Jun;1(2):156-81 [PMID: 24203468]
  4. Behav Brain Sci. 1999 Jun;22(3):425-44; discussion 444-89 [PMID: 11301518]
  5. J Math Psychol. 2001 Aug;45(4):564-602 [PMID: 11493015]
  6. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1985 Apr;11(2):262-71 [PMID: 3157767]
  7. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1992 Jul;18(4):667-80 [PMID: 1385608]
  8. Mem Cognit. 2001 Jun;29(4):547-56 [PMID: 11504003]
  9. Psychon Bull Rev. 1997 Jun;4(2):145-66 [PMID: 21331823]
  10. Psychol Bull. 1993 Jul;114(1):3-28 [PMID: 8346328]
  11. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1988 Mar;117(1):34-50 [PMID: 2966230]
  12. Mem Cognit. 1975 May;3(3):287-94 [PMID: 21287075]
  13. Psychol Rev. 1988 Jan;95(1):91-101 [PMID: 3353477]
  14. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1984 Apr;10(2):181-97 [PMID: 6242738]
  15. Psychol Rev. 1984 Jan;91(1):1-67 [PMID: 6571421]
  16. Q J Exp Psychol. 1978 May;30(2):347-54 [PMID: 674543]
  17. Psychon Bull Rev. 1996 Mar;3(1):37-60 [PMID: 24214802]
  18. Mem Cognit. 1973 Dec;1(4):430-4 [PMID: 24214636]
  19. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1994 Jul;20(4):946-52 [PMID: 8064253]
  20. Cortex. 1985 Dec;21(4):487-511 [PMID: 4092481]
  21. J Exp Child Psychol. 1997 Sep;66(3):376-92 [PMID: 9299081]
  22. Psychol Rev. 1992 Jul;99(3):518-35 [PMID: 1502275]
  23. Cortex. 1989 Sep;25(3):479-88 [PMID: 2805733]
  24. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2000 May;26(3):582-600 [PMID: 10855419]
  25. Mem Cognit. 1995 Mar;23(2):213-26 [PMID: 7731366]
  26. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2001 Nov;27(6):1347-58 [PMID: 11713871]
  27. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2003 Jan;29(1):10-21 [PMID: 12549579]

MeSH Term

Algorithms
Humans
Judgment
Memory
Periodicity
Recognition, Psychology
Sensitivity and Specificity

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0JOFfrequencymemory1RCRrecognitionsingleeffectslopes0studyhypothesisfindingsbasisremindingJudgmentspresentationJOFscomparedconfidenceratingsRCRsexperimentTwodifferencesfound:Relativeexposuredurationlarger2ReplicatingfindingProctor1977normalizedoperatingcharacteristiczMOCcurvesgreaterwhereaslessslopedifferencefoundattributablefirsttrialresultscontrarystrengthfamiliaritydimensionunderliesexplainnewhypotheticalproposedRepetitionassumedtriggerphaseturnencodedRemindingscanrecursivelyembeddeddepthrecursionrecollectedtestprimaryappearsconsistentbroadrangeJudgmentversusconfidence:repetitionrecursive

Similar Articles

Cited By