Cue-framing effects in source remembering: A memory misattribution model

During source remembering, selectively emphasizing one source in the retrieval query “Is this item from Source A?” can yield different accuracy than emphasizing the alternate source in “Is this item from Source B?” even if those are the only two possible origins. One account of this cue-framing effect holds that it reflects different active monitoring strategies encouraged by the two cue frames. An item memory misattribution (IMM) model instead assumes that this effect reflects the uncontrolled use of item recognition during confirmatory source judgments, and an IMM model simulation predicted a quantitative relationship between recognition levels and the cue-framing effect. Experiments 1 and 3 confirmed these predictions by using study repetitions to manipulate recognition levels, and Experiments 2 and 3 also demonstrated the effect with new source tasks not previously considered. The data suggest that, in addition to qualitative monitoring strategies, subjects also use the availability of item memory in a heuristic fashion during confirmatory source attributions.     

Toward a complete decision model of item and source recognition

In a recognition memory test, subjects may be asked to decide whether a test item is old or new (item recognition) or to decide among alternative sources from which it might have been drawn for study (source recognition). Confidence-rating-based receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for these superficially similar tasks are quite different, leading to the inference of correspondingly different decision processes. A complete account of source and item recognition will require a single model that can be fit to the entire data set. We postulated a detection-theoretic decision space whose dimensions, in the style of Banks (2000), are item strength and the relative strengths of the two sources. A model that assumes decision boundaries of constant likelihood ratios, source guessing for unrecognized items, and nonoptimal allocation of attention can account for data from three canonical data sets without assuming any processes specifically devoted to recollection. Observed and predicted ROCs for one of these data sets are given in the article, and ROCs for the other two may be downloaded from the Psychonomic Society’s Archive of Norms, Stimuli, and Data, www.psychonomic.org/archive.     

No source memory for unrecognized items when implicit feedback is avoided

In a recent empirical study, Starns, Hicks, Brown, and Martin (Memory & Cognition, 36, 1–8 2008) collected source judgments for old items that participants had claimed to be new and found residual source discriminability depending on the old-new response bias. The authors interpreted their finding as evidence in favor of the bivariate signal-detection model, but against the two-high-threshold model of item/source memory. According to the latter, new responses only follow from the state of old-new uncertainty for which no source discrimination is possible, and the probability of entering this state is independent of the old-new response bias. However, when missed old items were presented for source discrimination, the participants could infer that the items had been previously studied. To test whether this implicit feedback led to second retrieval attempts and thus to source memory for presumably unrecognized items, we replicated Starns et al.’s (Memory & Cognition, 36, 1–8 2008) finding and compared their procedure to a procedure without such feedback. Our results challenge the conclusion to abandon discrete processing in source memory; source memory for unrecognized items is probably an artifact of the procedure, by which implicit feedback prompts participants to reconsider their recognition judgment when asked to rate the source of old items in the absence of item memory.     

What happens when we relearn part of what we previously knew? Predictions and constraints for models of long-term memory

 Part-set relearning studies examine whether relearning a subset of previously learned items impairs or improves memory for other items in memory that are not relearned. Atkins and Murre have examined part-set relearning using multi-layer networks that learn by optimizing performance on a complete set of items. For this paper, four computer models that learn each item additively and separately were tested using the part-set relearning procedure (Hebbian network, CHARM, MINERVA 2, and SAM). Optimization models predict that part-set relearning should improve memory for items not relearned, while additive models make the opposite prediction. This distinction parallels the relative ability of these models to account for interference phenomena. Part-set relearning provides another source of evidence for choosing between optimization and additive models of long-term memory. A new study suggests that the predictions of the additive models are broadly supported. Received: 29 April 1999 / Accepted: 26 July 1999     

图形项目记忆与位置来源提取的ERP研究

采用事件相关电位（ERP）方法研究大学生图形项目记忆与位置来源提取新/旧效应的时、空分布特征。学习屏幕左侧（或右侧）呈现的图形后在屏幕中央呈现某一测验项目（已学图形或新图形）,对受试者进行两类测验：其一是判断该项目是否已学过;其二是将从某侧学过的测验项目判断为目标,而将其它测验项目判断为非目标的来源测验（排除任务）。实验结果表明：图形位置来源提取比项目再认新/旧效应的头皮分布更广,持续时程更长;与前人相同实验范式的研究结果相比,本研究位置来源提取效应的头皮分布范围较广;非目标-旧图形与目标图形新/旧效应的头皮激活程度不同。上述结果说明：图形位置来源提取比项目再认激活的大脑区域更多,这与双重加工模型的观点一致;实验范式和来源知觉的特性共同调节来源记忆新/旧效应的时、空分布特征;意识水平对来源信息提取的新/旧效应存在一定的影响     

No retrieval-induced forgetting using item-specific independent cues: evidence against a general inhibitory account

Retrieval practice with particular items from memory can impair the recall of related items on a later memory test. This retrieval-induced forgetting effect has been ascribed to inhibitory processes (M. C. Anderson & B. A. Spellman, 1995). A critical finding that distinguishes inhibitory from interference explanations is that forgetting is found with independent (or extralist) cues. In 4 experiments, the authors tested whether the forgetting effect is cue-independent. Forgetting was investigated for both studied and unstudied semantically related items. Retrieval-induced forgetting was not found using item-specific independent cues for either studied or unstudied items. However, forgetting was found for both item types when studied categories were used as cues. These results are not in line with a general inhibitory account, because this account predicts retrieval-induced forgetting with independent cues. Interference and context-specific inhibition are discussed as possible explanations for the data.     

Metacognitive inferences in source memory judgements: The role of perceived differences in item recognition

This research investigated the hypothesis that metacognitive inferences in source memory judgements are based on the recognition or nonrecognition of an event together with perceived or expected differences in the recognizability of events from different sources. The hypothesis was tested with a multinomial source-monitoring model that allowed separation of source-guessing tendencies for recognized and unrecognized items. Experiments 1A and 1B manipulated the number of item presentations as relevant source information and revealed differential guessing tendencies for recognized and unrecognized items, with a bias to attribute unrecognized items to the source associated with poor item recognition. Experiments 2A and 2B replicated the findings with a manipulation of presentation time and extended the analysis to subjective differences in item recognition. Experiments 3A and 3B used more natural source information by varying type of acoustic signal and demonstrated that subjective theories about differences in item recognition are sufficient to elicit differential source-guessing biases for recognized and unrecognized items. Together the findings provide new insights into the cognitive processes underlying source memory decisions, which involve episodic memory and reconstructive tendencies based on metacognitive beliefs and general world knowledge.     

Metacognitive inferences in source memory judgements: the role of perceived differences in item recognition

This research investigated the hypothesis that metacognitive inferences in source memory judgements are based on the recognition or nonrecognition of an event together with perceived or expected differences in the recognizability of events from different sources. The hypothesis was tested with a multinomial source-monitoring model that allowed separation of source-guessing tendencies for recognized and unrecognized items. Experiments 1A and 1B manipulated the number of item presentations as relevant source information and revealed differential guessing tendencies for recognized and unrecognized items, with a bias to attribute unrecognized items to the source associated with poor item recognition. Experiments 2A and 2B replicated the findings with a manipulation of presentation time and extended the analysis to subjective differences in item recognition. Experiments 3A and 3B used more natural source information by varying type of acoustic signal and demonstrated that subjective theories about differences in item recognition are sufficient to elicit differential source-guessing biases for recognized and unrecognized items. Together the findings provide new insights into the cognitive processes underlying source memory decisions, which involve episodic memory and reconstructive tendencies based on metacognitive beliefs and general world knowledge.     

Remembering the place with the tiger: Survival processing can enhance source memory

Rating the relevance of words for survival in the grasslands of a foreign land often leads to a memory advantage. However, it is as yet unclear whether the survival processing effect generalizes to source memory. Here, we examined whether people have enhanced source memory for the survival context in which an item has been encountered. Participants were asked to make survival-based or moving-based decisions about items prior to a classical source memory test. A multinomial model was used to measure old–new discrimination, source memory, and guessing biases separately. We replicated the finding of a survival advantage in old–new recognition. Extending previous results, we also found a survival-processing advantage in source memory. These results are in line with the richness-of-encoding explanation of the survival processing advantage and with an adaptive perspective on memory.     

Backward associative strength determines source attributions given to false memories

Source attributions for falsely remembered material were investigated in two experiments. A male and a female speaker each presented either an entire word list or half of the items from each of multiple Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) lists commonly used in this paradigm. In the latter condition the tendency of each list half to activate a nonpresented, critical list theme item was manipulated. All of the list halves differed in backward associative strength (BAS), and each was presented by one or the other of the two speakers. In these correlated conditions, when critical items were falsely recognized (Experiments 1 and 2) or recalled (Experiment 2), source attributions were more frequently made to the speaker of the list items with the higher average BAS. This source attribution effect appears to result from the binding of list item source characteristics to activated critical items during encoding, as opposed to being the result of a biased retrieval process. The results are interpreted as consistent with an activation/monitoring account of false memory in the DRM paradigm.     

The use of schematic knowledge about sources in source monitoring

Source monitoring refers to mental processes leading to attributions regarding the origin of information. We tested Johnson, Hashtroudi, and Lindsay's (1993) assumption that prior source-relevant knowledge is used in some source-monitoring tasks. In two experiments using different domains of schematic knowledge, two sources presented information that was expected for one source and somewhat unexpected for the other. In a later source-monitoring test, participants decided whether items had been presented by Source A, by Source B, or were new. The results of both experiments show that source identification is better for expected items than for somewhat unexpected items. Multinomial modeling analyses revealed that when participants do not remember the source of information, they guess that it was presented by the expected source. These results provide evidence for the claim that source monitoring can be based on prior knowledge and support a guessing hypothesis.     

视觉工作记忆中特征绑定关系的记忆机制

弱客体理论认为, 视觉工作记忆系统是由众多特征存储的子系统组成, 不同纬度的特征独立存储在相应的有限容量的子系统中, 相互之间不会竞争记忆资源。而对于特征之间绑定关系的记忆存在不同的观点。一种观点认为绑定关系的记忆需要注意维持, 因此绑定关系的记忆会占用到特征记忆的资源; 另一种观点认为绑定关系的记忆是自动发生的, 不需要注意的维持。本实验的目的是探究特征绑定关系的记忆是否是自动发生的。在实验中, 我们设计了两种任务, 一种任务是只记忆颜色, 另一种任务是记忆颜色跟位置及其之间的绑定关系, 并测试分析视觉工作记忆相关的ERP成分CDA。结果发现两种任务条件下的CDA波幅之间没有显著差异, 说明视觉工作记忆中的特征绑定是自动发生的。     

Word repetitions in sentence recognition

When some items on a list are strengthened by extra study time or repetitions, recognition of other, unrelated, list items is not harmed (Ratcliff, Clark, & Shiffrin, 1990). Shiffrin, Ratcliff, and Clark (1990) accounted for this list-strength finding with a model assuming that different items are stored separately in memory, but that repetitions are accumulated together into a single stronger memory trace. Repeating words in the context of different sentences might cause separate storage of the repetitions of a given word, because either word or sentence traces are stored separately. Separate storage would, in effect, convert a list-strength manipulation into a list-length manipulation and thereby induce a positive list-strength effect. In Experiment 1, this result was produced for single-word recognition and for two types of sentence recognition. In Experiment 2, both words and sentences were repeated together, which should have caused repetitions to be stored in a single, stronger, trace. As expected, the list-strength effect was eliminated. A sentence trace model was fit to the data, supporting the account of Shiffrin et al. (1990) and supporting an account of word and sentence recognition in which activation is summed for representations of all list items. The results from the two studies are inconsistent with most current models of memory (as shown by the theoretical analyses of Shiffrin et al., 1990) and pose an additional challenge for theory.     

多维题组效应Rasch模型

首先, 本文诠释了“题组”的本质即一个存在共同刺激的项目集合。并基于此, 将题组效应划分为项目内单维题组效应和项目内多维题组效应。其次, 本文基于Rasch模型开发了二级评分和多级评分的多维题组效应Rasch模型, 以期较好地处理项目内多维题组效应。最后, 模拟研究结果显示新模型有效合理, 与Rasch题组模型、分部评分模型对比研究后表明：(1)测验存在项目内多维题组效应时, 仅把明显的捆绑式题组效应进行分离而忽略其他潜在的题组效应, 仍会导致参数的偏差估计甚或高估测验信度; (2)新模型更具普适性, 即便当被试作答数据不存在题组效应或只存在项目内单维题组效应, 采用新模型进行测验分析也能得到较好的参数估计结果。     

Source Monitoring and Executive Function in 2.5- to 3-Year-Olds

Hala, Brown, McKay, and San Juan (2013) found that children as young as 2.5 years of age demonstrated high levels of accuracy when asked to recall whether they or the experimenter had carried out a particular action. In the research reported here, we examined the relation of early-emerging source monitoring to executive function abilities. Participants were children aged 2.5- to 3-years old. For the source-monitoring procedure, we used the Hala et al. (2013) task in which children and the experimenter took turns placing a total of 20 items on a model farm (encoding phase). For the source memory test, children were asked who had placed each item (retrieval phase). Executive function measures included assessments of working memory, delay-inhibitory control, and conflict-inhibitory control. The main finding was that inhibitory control measures were significantly related to performance on the source-monitoring task. This relation held for the conflict-inhibitory control measures even when controlling for age and vocabulary. The findings of this research suggest that even at the early age of 2.5 years, development of executive control is linked to the emergence of source-monitoring ability.     

Overdistribution in source memory

Semantic false memories are confounded with a second type of error, overdistribution, in which items are attributed to contradictory episodic states. Overdistribution errors have proved to be more common than false memories when the 2 are disentangled. We investigated whether overdistribution is prevalent in another classic false memory paradigm: source monitoring. It is. Conventional false memory responses (source misattributions) were predominantly overdistribution errors, but unlike semantic false memory, overdistribution also accounted for more than half of true memory responses (correct source attributions). Experimental control of overdistribution was achieved via a series of manipulations that affected either recollection of contextual details or item memory (concreteness, frequency, list order, number of presentation contexts, and individual differences in verbatim memory). A theoretical model was used to analyze the data (conjoint process dissociation) that predicts that (a) overdistribution is directly proportional to item memory but inversely proportional to recollection and (b) item memory is not a necessary precondition for recollection of contextual details. The results were consistent with both predictions.     

Testing global memory models using ROC curves.

Global memory models are evaluated by using data from recognition memory experiments. For recognition, each of the models gives a value of familiarity as the output from matching a test item against memory. The experiments provide ROC (receiver operating characteristic) curves that give information about the standard deviations of familiarity values for old and new test items in the models. The experimental results are consistent with normal distributions of familiarity (a prediction of the models). However, the results also show that the new-item familiarity standard deviation is about 0.8 that of the old-item familiarity standard deviation and independent of the strength of the old items (under the assumption of normality). The models are inconsistent with these results because they predict either nearly equal old and new standard deviations or increasing values of old standard deviation with strength. Thus, the data provide the basis for revision of current models or development of new models.     

Retrieval-induced forgetting occurs in tests of item recognition

Using the retrieval-practice paradigm (Anderson, R. A. Bjork, & E. L. Bjork, 1994), we tested whether or not retrieval-induced forgetting could be found in item recognition tests. In Experiment 1, retrieval practice on items from semantic categories depressed recognition of nonpracticed items from the same categories. Similar results were found in Experiment 2 in a more stringent source test for practiced, nonpracticed, and new items. These results conceptually replicate those of previous retrieval-induced forgetting studies done with cued recall (e.g., Anderson et al., 1994). Our findings are inconsistent with the hypothesis that item-specific cues during retrieval will eliminate retrieval interference in the retrieval-practice paradigm (Butler, Williams, Zacks, & Maki, 2001). We discuss our results in relation to other retrieval interference and inhibition effects in recall and recognition.     

不同情绪背景下来源记忆的ERPs研究*

使用事件相关电位(ERP)技术和测试来源记忆的多键范式,探讨不同情绪效价背景下来源提取的认知神经机制。学习阶段,同时呈现汉字和3种效价情绪图片(重叠);测验阶段,只呈现汉字,要求被试进行四键判断：旧字且背景为中性,旧字且背景为正性,旧字且背景为负性,新字。结果发现：在提取阶段,刺激呈现后300~500 ms,3种情绪背景下来源判断正确项目和来源判断错误项目都比新项目诱发了更正的ERPs(即都存在新旧效应),这一结果反映出刺激呈现后300~500 ms 是一个早期的项目提取阶段,它独立于来源提取。并且,在中性背景下,两种新旧效应没有差别;而在正性和负性背景下,来源判断正确项目的新旧效应显著大于来源判断错误项目。说明相比于中性背景,情绪背景下被试可能更早对来源信息产生熟悉感。在500~650 ms,3种情绪背景下都存在来源判断正确项目的新旧效应,在来源判断错误项目和新项目之间没有显著差异,来源正确与来源错误有显著的新旧效应差异,但二者在头皮分布上是类似的,这反映了晚期的来源提取过程。同时来源正确的新旧效应在这两个时段有显著不同的头皮分布,表明这两个时段有不同加工过程。另外,在500~650 ms,存在显著的情绪效应,正性背景下正确判断来源诱发的ERPs比中性和负性背景下的更正,而且来源判断错误条件下没有情绪效应。综上所述,来源正确和来源错误可能仅仅反映了大脑激活在量上的不同,并不能推断两者存在质的差异;大脑神经活动的早期不仅反映了对记忆项目的熟悉性,而且也受情绪效应的影响,500 ms之后大脑神经活动反映的是对记忆项目回想的过程,这一回想过程也与情绪效应有关,受到情绪效应的调节。