No abstract

Within the context of an interactive anagram-solving task, the present studies tested predictions about the role of cognitive anticipation in both source and item memory. After working in pairs to solve anagram problems, participants were surprised by a source-monitoring test focused on the source of solutions (self vs. partner, Experiment 1) or a standard recognition test focused on the solutions themselves (Experiment 2). With the intention of affecting the opportunity to anticipate partners' solutions, two variables were manipulated: anagram difficulty (easy vs. hard) and the delaybetween the presentation of an anagram problem and theprompt tha t designated one member of each pair as the anagram solver. Consistent w i th predictions, asthe opportunity t oanticipate partners'solutions increased, there was a decrease in source accuracy suggesting increased confusion about whether the solution had been self- or partner-generated. Generation-effect failures were observed in item memory. However, these failures reflected increases in item memory for partners' responses rather than decreases in memory for self-generated ones. These studies suggest that when opportunities to anticipate partners' responses are available, self-generative activities may be associated with both self-and partner-generated items, influencing the expression of the generation effect.

No abstract

Three different stimulus modalities (line length, number, and sound pressure) were judged by magnitude scaling techniques and by 7-, 15',31-, and 75·point category scales. All of the 40 subjects were given the same number stimuli, but two different sound-pressure ranges were presented (each to 20 subjects) and four different line-length ranges were presented (each to 10 subjects). Analyses of lack of fit for various simple functions were performed to determine bestfitting functions. The simple power function was often found to be an adequate fit to the data for all the response modalities used, although all of the response modalities were sensitive to changes in stimulus range. For simple power functions, the category-scale exponent was a function of both the range of stimuli and the number of categories provided. Category scales did not always produce exponents smaller than those obtained with magnitude estimation, which calls into question the concept of a virtual exponent for category scales.Numerous methodologies have been developed to enable the social or behavioral scientist to explore and quantify subjects' perceptions of various stimuli. Categorical-rating scales and magnitude scales are two approaches that have been used to investigate a wide variety of physical (e.g., loudness, brightness) and social (e.g., occupational prestige, acceptability of political candidates) stimuli. However, since the results obtained when the two methods are applied to the same stimuli are often at odds, there has been a great deal of controversy over the relative merits of the two methods (e.g., Anderson, 1974aAnderson, , 1974bMarks, 1974;Stevens, 1975).At the root of this controversy seems to be the lack of adequate models relating each of the scaling methods to the target stimuli. Were these models fully specified, then the relationship between category scales and magnitude scales could also be determined, and the controversy should evaporate. This paper attempts to move toward this goal by identifying some additional parameters that are necessary to any model relating category scales to physical stimuli.Part of the problem facing investigators is the difficulty of evaluating alternative models by examining their goodness of fit. We are in basic agreement with Birnbaum (1973Birnbaum ( , 1974 that the correlation coefficient is not appropriate for this purpose, and yet researchersWe would like to acknowledge the helpful criticisms of earlier versions of this paper by D. Emmerich, G. Lockhead, J. Tanenhaus, M. Teghtsoonian, and an anonymous reviewer.