Strength-based criterion shifts in recognition memory

Singer, Murray

doi:10.3758/mc.37.7.976

Cited by 35 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 57 publications

(107 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…That is, participants are somewhat conservative in their allocation of confidence ratings at the easy end of task difficulty. This observation is in line with previous reports that stricter criteria are typically applied to strongly encoded stimuli and thus easier detection and recognition performance (Singer, 2009). On the assumption that trials themselves vary on a continuum of difficulty for each person in a given experiment, this pattern implies that for low values of hit rate participants allocate more ratings of 1 and 2 than they "ought to" given the difficulty level, so the remaining "0" allocations are given to the most difficult trials, and correspondingly show a low probability of being correct.…”

supporting

confidence: 93%

The psychology of intelligence analysis: Drivers of prediction accuracy in world politics.

Mellers¹,

Stone²,

Atanasov³

et al. 2015

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

134

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article extends psychological methods and concepts into a domain that is as profoundly consequential as it is poorly understood: intelligence analysis. We report findings from a geopolitical forecasting tournament that assessed the accuracy of more than 150,000 forecasts of 743 participants on 199 events occurring over 2 years. Participants were above average in intelligence and political knowledge relative to the general population. Individual differences in performance emerged, and forecasting skills were surprisingly consistent over time. Key predictors were (a) dispositional variables of cognitive ability, political knowledge, and openmindedness; (b) situational variables of training in probabilistic reasoning and participation in collaborative teams that shared information and discussed rationales (Mellers, Ungar, et al., 2014); and (c) behavioral variables of deliberation time and frequency of belief updating. We developed a profile of the best forecasters; they were better at inductive reasoning, pattern detection, cognitive flexibility, and open-mindedness. They had greater understanding of geopolitics, training in probabilistic reasoning, and opportunities to succeed in cognitively enriched team environments. Last but not least, they viewed forecasting as a skill that required deliberate practice, sustained effort, and constant monitoring of current affairs. A t APA, we understand how challenging it can be for you to stay abreast of the latest and best academic research on psychology. Disciplines Finance and Financial Management | Social and Behavioral Sciences

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 93%

The psychology of intelligence analysis: Drivers of prediction accuracy in world politics.

Mellers¹,

Stone²,

Atanasov³

et al. 2015

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

134

130

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, a growing literature has demonstrated that participants tend not to make appropriate criterion shifts in response to changing classes of items (e.g., strongly vs. weakly encoded) when the shifts must occur within a single test list (Stretch & Wixted, 1998;Verde & Rotello, 2007). Generally, within-list criterion shifts are not observed unless the two item classes are strikingly different (Bruno, Higham, & Perfect, 2009;Singer, 2009;Singer & Wixted, 2006) or corrective feedback is administered (Rhodes & Jacoby, 2007;Verde & Rotello, 2007). Participants' resistance to within-list criterion shifting might be a partial result of inherent bias tendencies that anchor shifting behavior.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another class of studies has investigated the extent to which participants can adjust criterion during the course of a test when conditions such as the memory strength of probes or target-distractor similarity are changed midstream (e.g., Benjamin & Bawa, 2004;G. E. Cox & Shiffrin, 2012;Dobbins & Kroll, 2005;Singer, 2009; for a review, see Hockley, 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Response bias in recognition memory as a cognitive trait

Kantner

Lindsay

2012

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A few studies have shown mirror effects when strength is signaled on an item-by-item basis during the recognition test (Singer, 2009;Singer & Wixted, 2006), although this effect is generally difficult to obtain (e.g., Stretch & Wixted, 1998). The tests in these experiments contained an equal mix of strong and weak targets in a random order, so there was no basis for changes in differentiation at test.…”

Section: Differentiation At Testmentioning

confidence: 99%

The strength-based mirror effect in subjective strength ratings: The evidence for differentiation can be produced without differentiation

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Criss (Cognitive Psychology 59:297-319, 2009) reported that subjective ratings of memory strength showed a mirror effect pattern in which strengthening the studied words increased ratings for targets and decreased ratings for lures. She interpreted the effect on lure items as evidence for differentiation, a process whereby lures produce a poorer match to strong than to weak memory traces. However, she also noted that participants might use different mappings between memory evidence and levels of the rating scale when they expected strong versus weak targets; that is, the effect might be produced by decision processes rather than differentiation. We report two experiments designed to distinguish these accounts. Some participants studied pure lists of weak or strong items (presented once or five times, respectively), while others studied mixed lists of half weak and half strong items. The participants from both groups had pure-strength tests: Only strong or only weak items were tested, and the participants were informed of which it would be before the test. The results showed that strength ratings for lures were lower when strong versus weak targets were tested, regardless of whether the study list was pure or mixed. In the mixed-study condition, the effect was produced even after identical study lists, and thus the same degree of differentiation in the studied traces. Therefore, our results suggest that the strength-rating mirror effect is produced by changes in decision processes.

show abstract

Strength-based criterion shifts in recognition memory

Cited by 35 publications

References 57 publications

The psychology of intelligence analysis: Drivers of prediction accuracy in world politics.

The psychology of intelligence analysis: Drivers of prediction accuracy in world politics.

Response bias in recognition memory as a cognitive trait

The strength-based mirror effect in subjective strength ratings: The evidence for differentiation can be produced without differentiation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About