Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research 3/2008

01-05-2008 | Original Article

The integration of familiarity and recollection information in short-term recognition: modeling speed-accuracy trade-off functions

Auteurs: Katrin Göthe, Klaus Oberauer

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 3/2008

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

Dual process models postulate familiarity and recollection as the basis of the recognition process. We investigated the time-course of integration of the two information sources to one recognition judgment in a working memory task. We tested 24 subjects with a response signal variant of the modified Sternberg recognition task (Oberauer, 2001) to isolate the time course of three different probe types indicating different combinations of familiarity and source information. We compared two mathematical models implementing different ways of integrating familiarity and recollection. Within each model, we tested three assumptions about the nature of the familiarity signal, with familiarity having (a) only positive values, indicating similarity of the probe with the memory list, (b) only negative values, indicating novelty, or (c) both positive and negative values. Both models provided good fits to the data. A model combining the outputs of both processes additively (Integration Model) gave an overall better fit to the data than a model based on a continuous familiarity signal and a probabilistic all-or-none recollection process (Dominance Model).
Voetnoten
1
This probability is equivalent to the probability that evidence with a mean of (f + r) surpasses a threshold—bias. Hence, Model 1 is a signal detection model in which the zero point on the evidence dimension is set to the neutral criterion; the actual criterion is bias. The evidence is the sum of two continuous dimensions, f and r. The model therefore is closely related to the two-dimensional signal-detection model of Rotello et al. (2004).
 
2
Without this constraint, the perfect trade-off between the asymptotes of the two processes and the noise parameter would prevent a stable solution of the fit algorithm.
 
3
One might argue that the comparison of model versions is unfair because versions 1A and 1B have only six parameters whereas 1C has seven parameters. The within-version analyses, however, have shown that 1A and 1B could not be improved by adding free parameters. Moreover, the adjusted R 2 statistic takes penalizes 1C for its larger number of parameters.
 
4
The evidence for recall-to-reject can be expressed as a reduction in d′ computed from acceptance of intrusion probes as “hits” and acceptance of new probes as false alarms.
 
Literatuur
go back to reference Anderson, J. R., Lebiere, C., & Lovett, M. (1998). Performance. In J. R. Anderson, &C. Lebiere (Eds.), The atomic components of thought (pp. 57–100). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Anderson, J. R., Lebiere, C., & Lovett, M. (1998). Performance. In J. R. Anderson, &C. Lebiere (Eds.), The atomic components of thought (pp. 57–100). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
go back to reference Atkinson, R. C., Herrmann, D. J., & Wescourt, K. T. (1974). Search processes. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Recognition memory. Theories in cognitive psychology: the Loyola symposium (pp. 101–146). Potomac: Erlbaum. Atkinson, R. C., Herrmann, D. J., & Wescourt, K. T. (1974). Search processes. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Recognition memory. Theories in cognitive psychology: the Loyola symposium (pp. 101–146). Potomac: Erlbaum.
go back to reference Dosher, B. A. (1981). The effects of delay and interference: a speed accuracy study. Cognitive Psychology, 13, 551–582.CrossRef Dosher, B. A. (1981). The effects of delay and interference: a speed accuracy study. Cognitive Psychology, 13, 551–582.CrossRef
go back to reference Hintzman, D. L., & Curran, T. (1994). Retrieval dynamics of recognition and frequency judgments: evidence for separate processes of familiarity and recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 1–18.CrossRef Hintzman, D. L., & Curran, T. (1994). Retrieval dynamics of recognition and frequency judgments: evidence for separate processes of familiarity and recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 1–18.CrossRef
go back to reference Jacoby, L. L. (1991). A process dissociation framework: separating automatic from intentional uses of memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 513–541.CrossRef Jacoby, L. L. (1991). A process dissociation framework: separating automatic from intentional uses of memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 513–541.CrossRef
go back to reference Jacoby, L. L., Toth, J. P., & Yonelinas, A. P. (1993). Separating conscious and unconscious influences of memory: measuring recollection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(2), 139–154.CrossRef Jacoby, L. L., Toth, J. P., & Yonelinas, A. P. (1993). Separating conscious and unconscious influences of memory: measuring recollection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(2), 139–154.CrossRef
go back to reference Jonides, J., Smith, E. E., Marshuetz, C., Koeppe, R. A., & Reuter-Lorenz, P. (1998). Inhibition in verbal working memory revealed by brain activation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 95, 8410–8413.CrossRef Jonides, J., Smith, E. E., Marshuetz, C., Koeppe, R. A., & Reuter-Lorenz, P. (1998). Inhibition in verbal working memory revealed by brain activation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 95, 8410–8413.CrossRef
go back to reference Mandler, G. (1980). Recognizing: the judgment of previous occurrence. Psychological Review, 87(3), 252–271.CrossRef Mandler, G. (1980). Recognizing: the judgment of previous occurrence. Psychological Review, 87(3), 252–271.CrossRef
go back to reference McElree, B. (2001). Working memory and the focus of attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 817–835.PubMedCrossRef McElree, B. (2001). Working memory and the focus of attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 817–835.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference McElree, B., & Dosher, B. A. (1989). Serial position and set size in short-term memory: the time course of recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118(4), 346–373.CrossRef McElree, B., & Dosher, B. A. (1989). Serial position and set size in short-term memory: the time course of recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118(4), 346–373.CrossRef
go back to reference Mewhort, D. J. K., & Johns, E. E. (2000). The extralist-feature effect: evidence against item matching in short-term recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129(2), 262–284.CrossRef Mewhort, D. J. K., & Johns, E. E. (2000). The extralist-feature effect: evidence against item matching in short-term recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129(2), 262–284.CrossRef
go back to reference Monsell, S. (1978). Recency, immediate recognition memory, and reaction time. Cognitive Psychology, 10, 465–501.CrossRef Monsell, S. (1978). Recency, immediate recognition memory, and reaction time. Cognitive Psychology, 10, 465–501.CrossRef
go back to reference Oberauer, K. (2001). Removing irrelevant information from working memory: a cognitive aging study with the modified Sternberg task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 27(4), 948–957.CrossRef Oberauer, K. (2001). Removing irrelevant information from working memory: a cognitive aging study with the modified Sternberg task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 27(4), 948–957.CrossRef
go back to reference Oberauer, K. (2005). Binding and inhibition in working memory—individual and age differences in short-term recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 368–387.CrossRef Oberauer, K. (2005). Binding and inhibition in working memory—individual and age differences in short-term recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 368–387.CrossRef
go back to reference Oberauer, K., & Kliegl, R. (2001). Beyond resources: formal models of complexity effects and age differences in working memory. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 13, 187–215.CrossRef Oberauer, K., & Kliegl, R. (2001). Beyond resources: formal models of complexity effects and age differences in working memory. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 13, 187–215.CrossRef
go back to reference Reed, A. V. (1973). Speed-accuracy trade-off of recognition in immediate memory. Science, 181, 574–576.PubMedCrossRef Reed, A. V. (1973). Speed-accuracy trade-off of recognition in immediate memory. Science, 181, 574–576.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Rotello, C. M., & Heit, E. (1999). Two-process models of recognition memory: evidence for recall-to-reject? Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 432–453.CrossRef Rotello, C. M., & Heit, E. (1999). Two-process models of recognition memory: evidence for recall-to-reject? Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 432–453.CrossRef
go back to reference Rotello, C. M., Macmillan, N. A., & Reeder, J. A. (2004). Sum-difference theory of remembering and knowing: a two-dimensional signal-detection model. Psychological Review, 111, 588–616.PubMedCrossRef Rotello, C. M., Macmillan, N. A., & Reeder, J. A. (2004). Sum-difference theory of remembering and knowing: a two-dimensional signal-detection model. Psychological Review, 111, 588–616.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Sternberg, S. (1969). Memory scanning: mental processes revealed by reaction-time experiments. American Scientist, 57(4), 421–457.PubMed Sternberg, S. (1969). Memory scanning: mental processes revealed by reaction-time experiments. American Scientist, 57(4), 421–457.PubMed
go back to reference Yonelinas, A. P. (1994). Receiver-operating characteristics in recognition memory: evidence for a dual process model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 20(6), 1341–1354.CrossRef Yonelinas, A. P. (1994). Receiver-operating characteristics in recognition memory: evidence for a dual process model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 20(6), 1341–1354.CrossRef
go back to reference Yonelinas, A. P. (1999). The contribution of recollection and familiarity to recognition and source-memory judgments: a formal dual-process model and an analysis of receiver operating characteristics. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 25(6), 1415–1434.CrossRef Yonelinas, A. P. (1999). The contribution of recollection and familiarity to recognition and source-memory judgments: a formal dual-process model and an analysis of receiver operating characteristics. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 25(6), 1415–1434.CrossRef
go back to reference Yonelinas, A. P. (2002). The nature of recollection and familiarity: a review of 30 years of research. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 441–517.CrossRef Yonelinas, A. P. (2002). The nature of recollection and familiarity: a review of 30 years of research. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 441–517.CrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
The integration of familiarity and recollection information in short-term recognition: modeling speed-accuracy trade-off functions
Auteurs
Katrin Göthe
Klaus Oberauer
Publicatiedatum
01-05-2008
Uitgeverij
Springer-Verlag
Gepubliceerd in
Psychological Research / Uitgave 3/2008
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-007-0111-9

Andere artikelen Uitgave 3/2008

Psychological Research 3/2008 Naar de uitgave