Is there a special association between self judgements and conscious recollection?

Abstract

Dual‐process models of recognition memory posit a rapid retrieval process that produces a general sense of familiarity and a slower retrieval process that produces conscious recollections of prior experience. The Remember–Know paradigm has been used to study the subjective correlates of these two processes with Remember judgements assumed to index conscious recollection and Know judgements assumed to index familiarity. In this paper we examine Conway and Dewhurst's recent finding that judgements of self during encoding produce more Remember responses than alternative semantic judgements. While one might interpret this result to suggest a special association between self judgement and conscious recollection, we consider the possibility that it occurs because of greater discriminability in this condition. The results of four experiments demonstrate that a self judgement condition produces more, fewer, or an equal number of Remember responses relative to a control condition depending on whether overall discriminability in the self judgement condition is greater than, less than, or equal to that in the control condition. The implications of these results for conceptions of self judgement and the use of the Remember–Know paradigm are detailed. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Decisions and the evolution of memory: Multiple systems, multiple functions.

“…The relation between trait summary knowledge and summaryconsistent behavioral memories. The results from the present studies, taken together with the supporting body of preceding research (e.g., Babey, et al, 1998;Craik et al, 1999;Hirshman & Lanning, 1999;Kircher et al, 2000;Klein & Kihlstrom, 1998;Klein & Loftus, 1990Klein et al, 1989Klein et al, , 1993Klein et al, , 1997Klein, Loftus, & Kihlstrom, 1996;Klein, Loftus, & Plog, 1992;Klein, Loftus, Trafton, & Fuhrman, 1992;…”

“…The results from the present studies, taken together with the supporting body of preceding research (e.g., Babey, et al, 1998; Craik et al, 1999; Hirshman & Lanning, 1999; Kircher et al, 2000; Klein & Kihlstrom, 1998; Klein & Loftus, 1990, 1993a, 1993b; Klein et al, 1989, 1993, 1997; Klein, Loftus, & Kihlstrom, 1996; Klein, Loftus, & Plog, 1992; Klein, Loftus, Trafton, & Fuhrman, 1992; Klein, Sherman, & Loftus, 1996; Lord, 1993; Schell et al, 1996; Sherman et al, 1998; Sherman & Klein, 1994; Tulving, 1993a) allow construction of a framework of inferences concerning the relation between summary-consistent behaviors and trait summary knowledge.…”

Signal‐detection models as tools for interpreting judgements of recollections

“…Turning to ceiling effects, Conway et al (2001) criticize Hirshman and Lanning's (1999) interpretation of their own results, noting that 'ceiling effects also troubled H&L who rather unconvincingly dismiss them on the basis that their effects were significant, i.e. there were reliably more R than K responses.…”

“…In the context of these positive impressions of Conway et al's work, we would like to make several points about our (Hirshman and Master, 1997;Hirshman and Henzler, 1998;Hirshman, 1998;Hirshman and Lanning, 1999) research and its motivation to correct some misimpressions that may have arisen from Conway et al's (2001) article.…”

“…Hirshman and Lanning focused on this issue because, according to the two-criterion signal-detection model, differences in hit rates across conditions can produce differences in remember rates across conditions. While statistical analyses of Conway and Dewhurst's (1995) data did not demonstrate hitrate differences between encoding conditions, Hirshman and Lanning (1999) suggested that the power to detect such hit-rate differences might be low because of the use of a between-subjects manipulation of encoding task in Conway and Dewhurst's (1995) experiments. Conway et al (2001) responded to Hirshman and Lanning's (1999) comments by examining the power to detect the 'interaction between orienting task at encoding (of which, in C and D, there were three levels, high self-reference, low self-reference, and trait valence judgments) with type of memory awareness (R and K) accompanying hits during a later recognition-memory test'.…”