Confidence level and feeling of knowing for episodic and semantic memory: an investigation of lorazepam effects on metamemory

Bacon, Élisabeth; Danion, Jean-Marie; Kauffmann-Muller, F.; Schelstraete, Marie‐Anne; Bruant, Agnès; Sellal, François; Grangé, Danielle

doi:10.1007/s002130050677

Cited by 33 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These results replicate earlier studies, which reported that CLs expressed at the time of retrieval were lower under the effects of the lorazepam drug than in a placebo group, in a task assessing episodic memory (Bacon et al, 1998). However, in this study, the magnitude of the prediction of the FOK with regard to the future retrievability of items that they had failed to recall was not found to be affected by lorazepam intake.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Specific Effects of an Amnesic Drug: Effect of Lorazepam on Study Time Allocation and on Judgment of Learning

Izaute

Bacon

2004

Neuropsychopharmacol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated the effects of lorazepam, a benzodiazepine, on the allocation of study time, memory, and judgment of learning, in a cognitive task where the repetition of word presentation was manipulated. The aim was to assess whether lorazepam would affect the learning processes and/or whether the participants would be aware of the amnesic difficulty. A total of 30 healthy volunteers participated in the study, 15 of whom received a capsule containing the lorazepam drug (0.038 mg/kg) and 15 a placebo capsule. First, the accuracy of delayed judgments of learning (JOL) was measured in both groups. For the JOL ratings, results showed that all the participants benefited from word repetition. Although the overall performance was lower in the lorazepam than in the placebo group, the accuracy of the JOL ratings was preserved by the drug. Second, all the participants benefited from the repetition of learning, although the performances of the lorazepam-treated subjects remained lower than those of the placebo participants. The repetition of learning had an effect on JOL in both groups. Finally, the time spent learning each (allocation study time) pair of words was measured. For the placebo group, results revealed that study time decreased significantly with the frequency of presentation. For the lorazepam group, no effect of presentation frequency was found. Overall, our findings suggest that the lorazepam drug has a differential effect on the monitoring and the control processes involved in a learning task. The implications of these findings are discussed within the theoretical framework of metacognition.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…In the case of memory retrieval, Bacon et al (1998) were the first to investigate the effects of lorazepam on memory accuracy and metamemory rating. Their results indicated that the lorazepam drug impaired the metamemory processes, the semantic ones, and also the metamemory processes related to episodic memory.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Specific Effects of an Amnesic Drug: Effect of Lorazepam on Study Time Allocation and on Judgment of Learning

Izaute

Bacon

2004

Neuropsychopharmacol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…generate, or generate/recognize; Jacoby, 1998); accessibility bias (Jacoby et al, 2001), etc. Unfortunately, such effects have seldom been investigated in the BZ literature (for exceptions in studies using L, see Bacon et al, 1998;Massin-Krauss et al, 2002). Future studies in this area contrasting L-induced effect to those of other BZs in equipotent doses may help to determine the underlying mechanisms that make L unique in terms of cognitive effects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Stem‐completion tasks (indirect, direct inclusion and exclusion) are differently affected by equipotent doses of lorazepam and flunitrazepam

Pompéia¹,

Bueno²,

Galduróz³

et al. 2003

Human Psychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was designed to explore the effects on performance in stem-completion tasks of two benzodiazepines (BZ) in equipotent doses: lorazepam, a drug that atypically disrupts perceptual priming, and flunitrazepam, a compound with standard BZ effects. The study followed a placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group design. Thirty-six young and healthy subjects carried out three completion tasks at theoretical peak-plasma concentrations of drugs: (a) indirect tasks, in which the subjects were instructed to complete stems with the first word that came to mind; (b) direct inclusion tasks/cued recall, in which the participants had to try to use words seen at study as completions; and (c) direct exclusion tasks, in which words seen at study were to be avoided. The PDP was applied to the results in the inclusion and exclusion tasks, to obtain indices of explicit/controlled (C) and implicit/automatic (A) memory. The C index was lowered by both BZs and A was equivalent in all treatments, confirming the general amnestic action of BZs. However, lorazepam led to decreases in completions in the indirect and inclusion tasks, while flunitrazepam impaired performance in the exclusion task. The qualitative differences between the drugs in their effects on performance suggest that these BZs may lead to differences in response bias.

show abstract

“…Interestingly, although participants cannot recall the target item at the time of the judgment, they can predict rather accurately whether they will later be able to recognize the answer. Several researchers have investigated the relations among various metacognitive judgments, such as FOKs, JOLs, and confidence judgments (about whether or not a person was correct in his or her recall, for example; see Bacon et al, 1998;Costermans, Lories, & Ansay, 1992;Nelson, 1984;Roy-Byrne et al, 1987;Schnyer et al, 2004). The conclusion has been (Leonesio & Nelson, 1990) that these judgments are typically not correlated with one another and, furthermore, that a person who is good at (or impaired on) one type of judgment is not necessarily good at (or impaired on) another.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Judgments of learning: Evidence for a two-stage process

Son

Metcalfe

2005

Memory & Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The question addressed in this article is this: How do people make judgments of learning? Judgments of learning (JOLs) are assessments that people make about how well they have learned particular information-that is, predictions about how likely they will be to remember a target item when later given a cue. These assessments are then, presumably, used to control further study (Benjamin, Bjork, & Schwartz, 1998;Dunlosky & Hertzog, 1998;Mazzoni, Cornoldi, & Marchitelli, 1990;Metcalfe, 2002;Metcalfe & Kornell, 2003;Nelson & Dunlosky, 1991;Nelson, Dunlosky, Graf, & Narens, 1994;Nelson & Narens, 1990Son, 2004;Son & Metcalfe, 2000). For example, Nelson and Dunlosky argued that "the accuracy of JOLs is critical, because if the JOLs are inaccurate, the allocation of subsequent study time will correspondingly be less than optimal" (p. 267). Because their role in learning is crucial, understanding the mechanisms underlying these judgments is central to understanding people's control of their own mental processes and for finding ways to ameliorate those processes. We will argue here that JOLs made at a delay are based on two distinct processes rather than on only the single retrieval process that previous researchers have emphasized. If so, then understanding both of those processes, and the pitfalls therein, may be pivotal to improving people's performance. In this article, we provide data that challenge the assumption that delayed JOLs are made only by an assessment of retrieval goodness or fluency. We argue and provide evidence that JOLs, like other metacognitive judgments, instead may involve two distinct stages: (1) a quick preretrieval stage based, perhaps, on cue familiarity, which determines whether or not the second stage-retrieval-will occur, and (2) a later stage in which the judgments are based on an assessment of the goodness and/or fluency of retrieval or on other aspects of the target that can become apparent once retrieval has been attempted.In the typical delayed-JOL paradigm that we investigated, participants studied cue-target pairs. Following study, they were presented with only the cue and were asked to judge how confident they were that they would be able to remember the target when they were given the cue on a future memory test. Then, at some later time, they were given a test. The prevailing view of how such JOLs are made is that when given the cue, people try to retrieve the target and base their judgments on their perception of some of the qualities of that attempted retrieval of the target, such as how quickly, easily, or fluently it comes to mind, or on how replete the retrieved information is (Begg, Duft, Lalonde, Melnick, & Sanvito, 1989;Benjamin et al., 1998;Dunlosky, Rawson, & McDonald, 2002;Kelley & Lindsay, 1993;Maki, 1998;Nelson & Dunlosky, 1991;Nelson & Narens, 1990;Nelson, Narens, & Dunlosky, 2004;Spellman & Bjork, 1992;. Three experiments tested the hypothesis that people make judgments of learning (JOLs) by attempting to retrieve the target first. If this were the whole story, then ...

show abstract

Confidence level and feeling of knowing for episodic and semantic memory: an investigation of lorazepam effects on metamemory

Cited by 33 publications

References 28 publications

Specific Effects of an Amnesic Drug: Effect of Lorazepam on Study Time Allocation and on Judgment of Learning

Specific Effects of an Amnesic Drug: Effect of Lorazepam on Study Time Allocation and on Judgment of Learning

Stem‐completion tasks (indirect, direct inclusion and exclusion) are differently affected by equipotent doses of lorazepam and flunitrazepam

Judgments of learning: Evidence for a two-stage process

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About