Fuzzy-trace theory and false memory: Meta-analysis of conjoint recognition.

Abstract

The conjoint-recognition model (CRM) implements fuzzy-trace theory’s opponent process conception of false memory. Within the family of measurement models that separate the memory effects of recollection and familiarity, CRM is the only one that accomplishes this for false as well as true memory. We assembled a corpus of 537 sets of conjoint-recognition data, with estimates of CRM’s parameters plus goodness-of-fit statistics being available for all the data sets. This corpus was used to conduct a meta-analysis of CRM’s underlying process assumptions by pitting two theoretical interpretations of the model against each other: (a) the original interpretation, which assumes that its retrieval parameters tap a single recollection process (verbatim retrieval) and a single familiarity process (gist retrieval), and (b) the dual-recollection interpretation, which assumes that its parameters also tap a second recollection process (context retrieval). The two interpretations generate a series of differential predictions that fall into three groups—namely, predictions about invariant relations among parameters, about the structure of CRM’s parameter space, and about the location of individual parameters within the space. When these predictions were evaluated with the corpus, the results converged on the dual-recollection interpretation. The results also resolved a long-standing uncertainty about whether the familiarity process for true memory is semantically or perceptually driven.

Context and target recollection for words and pictures in young adults with developmental dyslexia

“…The multinomial model for the conjoint recognition paradigm, which is the main method used in FTT research, was created in several different variants, starting with the first model proposed by Brainerd et al (1999) , through its simplified version proposed by Stahl and Klauer (2008 , 2009) , and further developments prepared by Brainerd et al (2010) and Brainerd et al (2021) . In all of these versions, three types of test stimuli are used: old items (targets), unrelated distractors, and related distractors.…”

“…It must be noted that DRT is directly connected with FTT, however, these two theories are not interchangeable. As recently noted by Brainerd et al (2021) , FTT introduces two memory traces (verbatim and gist) instead of one memory trace, while DRT assumes yet another, third kind of trace—a context trace. Therefore, processes assumed in FTT become a basis for some of the processes assumed in DRT, but not all of them.…”

“…Developing FTT into the dual recollection theory may further extend our knowledge about the specificity of memory functioning in DD. Taking into account a recent meta-analysis and theoretical advances in dual-recollection theory, we will follow the terminology and concepts proposed by Brainerd et al (2021) .…”

“…Initially, context recollection was defined as based on gist trace retrieval (e.g., Brainerd et al, 2015 ). However, a recent meta-analysis conducted on a large set of conjoint recognition studies ( Brainerd et al, 2021 ) showed that the three-factor model fits the data better, where the context information is stored in a separate context trace. Therefore, on the one hand, the findings of the differences in memory functioning in dyslexia for gist traces are not a direct argument for the differences in the context memory.…”

Verb Recognition Abilities in Young and Older Adults as a Function of Linguistic Presentation Units

“…. Salthouse (1996)의 "처리 속도 이론(processing-speed theory)"에 따르면, 노년층의 인지 수행력은 두 가지의 메커니즘 (Brainerd, Bialer, & Chang, 2021;Brainerd & Reyna, 2005). FTT에 의하면, 제시된 단어를 정확하게 기억 하는 것은 표면정보 흔적이 주도하며, 제시되지 않은 단어를 제시 된 것으로 잘못 기억하는 것은 핵심정보 흔적이 주도한다고 한다 (Brainerd et al, 2021) (Tun, Wingfield, Rosen, & Blanchard, 1998).…”