Participants in recognition memory studies are now often asked to partition recognized items into ones that are accompanied by some recollective experience (those they remember) and ones that are not so accompanied (but which they know were previously encountered). Rather than detecting separate memory systems, such attempts to distinguish between remembering and knowing are better understood as a division of positive recognition responses into those that lie above a second decision criterion (remember) and those that do not (know). As such, the amount of memory associated with knowing is strongly dependent on the placement of the decision criteria. A meta-analysis of published data and a simple experiment tested predictions from the decision process analysis of remember/know responses.

/pdf/the-role-of-decision-processes-in-remembering-and-knowing-4zcqfubufc.pdf

The role of decision processes in remembering and knowing

https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/schacterlab/files/schacterisraelracine1999.pdf

Suppressing False Recognition in Younger and Older Adults: The Distinctiveness Heuristic ☆ ☆☆ ★

https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/schacterlab/files/koutstaal_schacter_jml_1997.pdf?m=1441908679

Gist-Based False Recognition of Pictures in Older and Younger Adults

Models of discrimination based on statistical decision theory distinguish sensitivity (the ability of an observer to reflect a stimulus-response correspondence defined by the experimenter) from response bias (the tendency to favor 1 response over others). Measures of response bias have received less attention than those of sensitivity. Bias measures are classified here according to 2 characteristics. The various bias statistics are compared on pragmatic and theoretical grounds, and it is concluded that criterion location measures have many advantages in empirical work

Response bias : characteristics of detection theory, threshold theory, and nonparametric indexes

People differ in the extent to which they emphasize feelings of activation or deactivation in their verbal reports of experienced emotion, termed arousal focus (AF). Two multimethod studies indicate that AF is linked to heightened interoceptive sensitivity (as measured by performance on a heartbeat detection task). People who were more sensitive to their heartbeats emphasized feelings of activation and deactivation when reporting their experiences of emotion over time more than did those who were less sensitive. This relationship was not accounted for by several other variables, including simple language effects. Implications for the role of interoception in experienced emotion and the validity of self-reported emotion are discussed.

/pdf/interoceptive-sensitivity-and-self-reports-of-emotional-4bz8v3n724.pdf

Brian Watts

Papers

Extensions of Grier's computational formulas for A' and B'' to below-chance performance.