Use of the familiarity difference cue in inferential judgments

The familiarity difference cue has been regarded as a general cue for making inferential judgments (Honda, Abe, Matsuks, & Yamagishi in Memory and Cognition, 39(5), 851–863, 2011; Schwikert & Curran in Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(6), 2341–2365, 2014). The current study tests a model of inference based on familiarity differences that encompasses the recognition heuristic (Goldstein & Gigerenzer, 1999, Goldstein & Gigerenzer in Psychological Review, 109(1), 75–90, 2002). In two studies, using a large pool of stimuli, participants rated their familiarity of cities and made choices on a typical city-size task. The data were fitted with the r-s model (Hilbig, Erdfelder, & Pohl in, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 37(4), 827–839, 2011), which was adapted to include familiarity differences. The results indicated that people used the familiarity difference cue because the participants ignored further knowledge in a substantial number of cases when the familiarity difference cue was available. An analysis of reaction-time data further indicated that the response times were shorter for heuristic judgments than for knowledge-only-based judgments. Furthermore, when knowledge was available, the response times were shorter when knowledge was congruent with a heuristic cue than when it was in conflict with it. Differences between the familiarity difference cue and the fluency heuristic (Schooler & Hertwig, 2005, Psychological Review, 112, 610–628) are discussed.     

Comparative judgments of animal intelligence and pleasantness

Symbolic comparisons of animal intelligence and pleasantness were investigated in five experiments using words and pictures as stimuli. Symbolic distance effects occurred in all experiments. Picture-word effects depended on the experimental design. Mean intelligence comparison reaction time (RT) did not differ for pictures and words when the pairs were presented to independent groups. With repeated measures, mean RT was faster for pictures than for words, but only on the second block of trials. This involved an asymmetrical transfer effect, so that word comparisons on the first trial block greatly facilitated picture comparisons on the second block, whereas picture comparisons did not facilitate subsequent word comparisons. Pleasantness comparisons showed a similar asymmetrical transfer pattern but differed from intelligence comparisons in that the mean RTs were faster with pictures than with words, even with an infinite item set and without prior exposure to the other class of material. The results are discussed in terms of dual coding and other models of symbolic comparisons.     

Domain familiarity as a cue for judgments of learning

Students differ in how much they already know about topics within and across their courses. Few studies, however, have examined the relationship between participants’ levels of knowledge across topics (i.e., their “domain familiarity”) and their learning of information from those topics, their study choices related to those topics, and their subjective self-assessments of their learning about the topics. As such, in two studies we had participants (Study 1, college students; Study 2, Mturk workers) rank their domain familiarity for several to-be-studied domains (e.g., chemistry, history), rate their efficacy and interest in those domains, study and make judgments of learning (JOLs) for facts from each domain, and finally complete a short-answer test over those facts. Participants’ efficacy and interest ratings for the topics were linearly related to their topic rankings, as were their recall of and JOLs for facts from those domains. Although the JOLs were consistently overconfident, they were more overconfident for better-known than for lesser-known topics. Participants’ study times were not related to their topic rankings (Studies 1 and 2), but participants did use domain familiarity to strategically decide which domains to restudy before the test (Study 2). Participants typically chose to restudy their least-familiar topics, but chose to restudy their best-known topic under extremely limited restudy conditions. As a whole, the results suggest that participants effectively use their domain familiarity as a basis for their JOLs and restudy choices, but to some extent overuse this factor to assess their learning, and underuse it to guide initial study.     

Types of inconsistency in health-state utility judgments

In making judgments of health-related quality of life, respondents often compare the relative magnitude of two intervals between health states, such as the interval between normal health and blindness compared to that between normal health and death. We examined two ways of comparing such intervals: person-trade-off (PTO)—in which the judgment concerns matching numbers of people so that two changes are equivalent—and direct judgment of the ratio. Both measures showed ratio inconsistency (a ratio that should be the product of two other ratios is too high) and superadditivity (two ratios that should add to 1 are too high). Some responses in both methods implied that two intervals which should have been different (because they shared a top or bottom point, but differed on the other point) were nevertheless viewed by subjects as being of equal size. These equality responses were more common when death was the bottom (worse end) of both intervals being compared (e.g., the interval between death and blindness is perceived as being the same size as the interval between death and normal health) than when any other condition was at the bottom or when the condition common to the two intervals was at the top. A second experiment indicated that subjects really do consider the intervals to be equal. Our findings argue for giving subjects a chance to reflect on such apparent inconsistencies in practical utility elicitation.     

Comparing judgments of stuttering made by students, clinicians, and highly experienced judges

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare judgments of stuttering made by students and clinicians with previously available judgments made by highly experienced judges in stuttering. Method: On two occasions, 41 university students and 31 speech-language pathologists judged the presence or absence of stuttering in each of 216 audiovisually recorded 5-s intervals of the speech of adults who stutter. Intrajudge and interjudge agreement were calculated, and comparisons were made to judgments previously made about the same recordings by 10 highly experienced judges of stuttering. Results: Students and clinicians showed similar and relatively high levels of intrajudge and interjudge agreement, but both students and clinicians identified less than half as much stuttering as the highly experienced judges had identified. Conclusions: These results replicate previous findings of high agreement coexisting with low accuracy in students’ judgments of stuttering, extending those findings to show that similar problems are evident in judgments made by practicing clinicians. Implications include the need for explicit stuttering judgment training programs for both students and practicing clinicians.

Educational objectives: After reading this article, the reader will be able to: (1) describe different methods for identifying stuttering and possible problems associated with each method; (2) describe two different methods for reporting interjudge reliability; (3) describe how the identification of stuttering differs for student, clinician, and highly experienced judges.     

Encoding fluency is a cue used for judgments about learning

The authors used paired-associate learning to investigate the hypothesis that the speed of generating an interactive image (encoding fluency) influenced 2 metacognitive judgments: judgments of learning (JOLs) and quality of encoding ratings (QUEs). Results from Experiments 1 and 2 indicated that latency of a keypress indicating successful image formation was negatively related to both JOLs and QUEs even though latency was unrelated to recall. Experiment 3 demonstrated that when concrete and abstract items were mixed in a single list, latency was related to concreteness, judgments, and recall. However, item concreteness and fluency influenced judgments independently of one another. These outcomes suggest an important role of encoding fluency in the formation of metacognitive judgments about learning and future recall.     

Developmental trends in cue utilization for attributional judgements

Fourth through twelfth graders of both sexes were tested for developmental trends in making causal attributions for success and failure and in using past history, social comparison, and importance information in making their attributional judgements. Results suggested that basic information processing rules had already developed by the fourth grade but that children continue to develop and become more consistent in applying these rules. Sex differences indicated that girls were more defensive generally in not taking responsibility for their outcomes by attributing them externally.     

Form recognition: Individual strategies in multivariate cue utilization

Twenty-five Ss were each presented 1,250 trials in a form-recognition task requiring S to find a form among 25 other forms on each trial. Fifty different eight-sided randomly derived polygons were used as stimuli, each presented in 25 different problems. Factors based on physical measures of the stimuli were correlated with observed latencies using multiple regression to assess cue-utilization strategies, while beta-weight profiles and intercorrelations of the Ss’ predicted latencies were used as indices of individual differences. Multiple correlations of physical-factor scores with observed latencies accounted for a significant proportion of the variance for all Ss, while between-S correlations of predicted latencies were never below .90. By all criteria employed, use of stimulus information was highly consistent among Ss. Replication of the experiment for one S revealed good reliability and nearly identical strategies.     

Simultaneous utilization of multiple cues in judgments of learning

There is much evidence that metacognitive judgments, such as people’s predictions of their future memory performance (judgments of learning, JOLs), are inferences based on cues and heuristics. However, relatively little is known about whether and when people integrate multiple cues in one metacognitive judgment or focus on a single cue without integrating further information. The current set of experiments systematically addressed whether and to what degree people integrate multiple extrinsic and intrinsic cues in JOLs. Experiment 1 varied two cues: number of study presentations (1 vs. 2) and font size (18 point vs. 48 point). Results revealed that people integrated both cues in their JOLs. Experiment 2 demonstrated that the two word characteristics concreteness (abstract vs. concrete) and emotionality (neutral vs. emotional) were integrated in JOLs. Experiment 3 showed that people integrated all four cues in their JOLs when manipulated simultaneously. Finally, Experiment 4 confirmed integration of three cues that varied on a continuum rather than in two easily distinguishable levels. These results demonstrate that people have a remarkable capacity to integrate multiple cues in metacognitive judgments. In addition, our findings render an explanation of cue effects on JOLs in terms of demand characteristics implausible.     

Effective cue utilization reduces memory errors in older adults

When compared with younger adults, older adults typically manifest poorer episodic memory. One hypothesis for the episodic memory deficit is that older adults may not encode contextual information as well as younger adults. Alternatively, older adults may use contextual information at retrieval less effectively when compared with younger adults. If older adults encode context less well than younger adults, then manipulations that affect context should have little effect on memory performance. To evaluate these 2 hypotheses, the authors used manipulations that promoted effective contextual cue utilization at retrieval. Retention interval and instructions at retrieval were manipulated within the imagination inflation paradigm. Results suggest that older adults encode contextual cues useful in improving memory performance but have difficulty accessing and using those cues.     

A room with a cue: personality judgments based on offices and bedrooms

The authors articulate a model specifying links between (a) individuals and the physical environments they occupy and (b) the environments and observers' impressions of the occupants. Two studies examined the basic phenomena underlying this model: Interobserver consensus, observer accuracy, cue utilization, and cue validity. Observer ratings based purely on offices or bedrooms were compared with self- and peer ratings of occupants and with physical features of the environments. Findings, which varied slightly across contexts and traits, suggest that (a) personal environments elicit similar impressions from independent observers, (b) observer impressions show some accuracy, (c) observers rely on valid cues in the rooms to form impressions of occupants, and (d) sex and race stereotypes partially mediate observer consensus and accuracy. Consensus and accuracy correlations were generally stronger than those found in zero-acquaintance research.     

Response speeding mediates the contributions of cue familiarity and target retrievability to metamnemonic judgments

Metamnemonic judgments are influenced by the retrievability of the target memory in question, but also by the familiarity of the cue used to elicit such judgments. However, there have been few suggestions as to what factors mediate the influence of these different sources of information on metamnemonic judgments. In this experiment, I examined the interactions between prediction time pressure and variables that promote either cue familiarity or target retrievability. The data reveal that target retrievability plays a larger role than does cue familiarity in fostering predictions of future recall made under unpressured conditions, but that cue familiarity influences predictions that are speeded. This pattern is interpreted by analogy with recognition memory: Mnemonic evidence based on familiarity is more impervious to the demands of time pressure than are the products of deliberative retrieval. Several explanations for this effect are suggested.     

Making judgments in a two‐sequence cue environment: The effects of differential cue strengths,order sequence,and distraction

Consumers frequently evaluate multiple sequential cues of varying strengths in order to draw inferences about a product's quality. The results of three experiments show that when consumers are not distracted, they judge a product's quality more favorably following a strong–weak cue sequence relative to a weak–strong sequence (a primacy effect). However once consumers are distracted from the evaluation task, the primacy effect reverses to a recency effect, whereby consumers judge a product's quality more favorably following a weak–strong cue sequence. Process tests suggest that distraction crowds consumers' short-term working memory and inhibits the spontaneous rehearsal and the subsequent recall of the cue presented first in the information sequence.     

Rating ability in performance judgments: The joint influence of implicit theories and intelligence

The purpose of this study was to approach the issue of rating ability by examining the influence of rater implicit theories and rater intelligence on rating outcomes. Using the inferential accuracy model (Jackson, 1972), raters were identified as either possessing a normative or idiosyncratic implicit theory of the occupation of college instructor. In a laboratory setting, 50 normative and 50 idiosyncratic raters judged the videotaped performance of either a good or poor lecturer. Results showed that (a) intelligence was positively related to rating accuracy and to possessing a normative implicit theory, (b) rater type moderated the relationship between intelligence and rating accuracy, and (c) controlling for intelligence, normative raters committed stronger halo effects than idiosyncratic raters. These results were discussed in relation to furthering the understanding of rating ability.