Accuracy of feeling-of-knowing judgments for predicting perceptual identification and relearning.

Abstract

The feeding of knowing refers to predictions about subsequent memory performance on previously nonrecalled items. The most frequently investigated type of subsequent performance has been recognition. The present research explored predictive accuracy with two new feeling-of-knowing criterion tests (in addition to recognition): relearning and perceptual identification. In two experiments, people attempted to recall the answers to general-information questions such as, "What is the capital of Australia?", then made feeling-of-knowing predictions for all nonrecalled answers, and finally had a criterion test to assess the accuracy of the feeling-of-knowing predictions. Experiment 1 demonstrated that perceptual identification can be employed successfully as a criterion test for the feeling of knowing. This opens a new way for metamemory research via perception. Moreover, the feeling-of-knowing accuracy for predicting perceptual identification was not significantly correlated with the feeling-of-knowing accuracy for predicting recognition, in accord with the idea that these two tests assess memory differently. Experiment 2 demonstrated that relearning performance can also be predicted by feeling-of-knowing judgments. Both experiments showed that there is a positive relationship between the feeling of knowing and the amount of time elapsing before a memory search is terminated during recall. Further analyses showed that this relationship is substantial for nonrecalled items for which the person did not guess an answer (omission errors), but the relationship is null or negative for nonrecalled items that the person guessed incorrectly (commission errors). Several theoretical mechanisms that may underlie the feeling of knowing are proposed.

Recall latencies, confidence, and output positions of true and false memories: Implications for recall and metamemory theories

“…It is suggested that the differential recall onset latency (the pause before typing the word) was the source of the recall latency difference between these two types of words. This finding was consistent with findings in other prior studies showing that the recall latency of commission errors was longer than that of the correct recall (Nelson et al, 1984; also see Nelson et al, 1990). In addition, this difference tended to increase with the output SP.…”

“…Also, confidence rating was found to be negatively correlated with latency but positively correlated with accuracy both in recognition (Jou, Matus, Aldridge, Rogers, & Zimmerman, 2004;Robinson, Johnson, & Herndon, 1997) and recall (Koriat, 1993;Nelson, Gerler, & Narens, 1984;Nelson & Narens, 1990). Hence, accuracy, recall latency, and confidence have been used as indices of memory strength by researchers.…”

Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder as a Disturbance of Security Motivation.

“…In the cognitive literature, the term feeling of knowing has been widely used to refer to the intuitive sense that one knows some piece of information even though at the moment one cannot yet bring it to mind (e.g., Nelson, Gerler, & Narens, 1984). We retain this distinction between the subjective sense of knowing and one's objectively verifiable knowledge.…”

Overt and covert identification of fragmented objects inferred from performance and electrophysiological measures.

“…After brain damage, some individuals (visual agnosics) display a profound inability to recognize an object for what it is despite normal vision, whereas others (anomics) show by their actions that they know what the object is and what it is typically used for but cannot name it; still others may not be able to use it properly. The tip-of-the-tongue experience attests to a similar dissociation even in intact individuals (Brown & MacNeill, 1966;Nelson, Gerler, & Narens, 1984;Valentine & Moore, 1995). Accordingly, it should not be surprising to find that much covert analysis including identification may precede conscious recognition and overt identification.…”