Dougherty Michael R P, Franco-Watkins Ana M
Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA.
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2003 May;113(1):23-44. doi: 10.1016/s0001-6918(02)00149-x.
A common finding in judgment and decision making is that people's frequency judgments often fail to map onto objective frequencies. The present research examined the possibility that one source of bias in frequency judgment is attributable to people's inability to screen out irrelevant memory traces. We used a two-list source-monitoring paradigm to investigate whether frequency judgments are influenced by "extra-experimental" experiences and whether enhancing source monitoring improves judgment accuracy. Across four experiments we found: (1) frequency judgments regarding one list were biased by the second, (2) manipulating encoding between lists improved source monitoring and resulted in more accurate judgments, (3) manipulating item context between lists improved source monitoring and resulted in more accurate judgments, but only when the context was item specific, and (4) manipulating simple-background context between lists was ineffective at improving source monitoring.
判断与决策中的一个常见发现是，人们的频率判断往往无法与客观频率相符。本研究探讨了频率判断偏差的一个来源可能是人们无法筛选出无关记忆痕迹的可能性。我们使用双列表源监测范式来研究频率判断是否受到“实验外”经历的影响，以及增强源监测是否能提高判断准确性。在四项实验中我们发现：（1）关于一个列表的频率判断受到另一个列表的偏差影响；（2）在列表间操纵编码可改善源监测并导致更准确的判断；（3）在列表间操纵项目背景可改善源监测并导致更准确的判断，但前提是背景是特定于项目的；（4）在列表间操纵简单背景对改善源监测无效。
