Rajaram Suparna, Hamilton Maryellen, Bolton Anthony
Department of Psychology, State University of New York, Stony Brook, New York 11794-2500, USA.
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2002 Sep;2(3):227-35. doi: 10.3758/cabn.2.3.227.
Two experiments were conducted to determine whether recollective experience is distinguishable from confidence. In Experiment 1, we tested college participants in a within-subjects design and replicated Gardiner and Java's (1990) findings from a between-subjects design. We observed higher remember judgments for words than for nonwords, but higher know judgments for nonwords than for words. For confidence judgments, we obtained greater sure than unsure responses for both words and nonwords. In Experiment 2, we tested amnesic participants and matched control participants. Control participants produced the same pattern of results as college participants, but the results of amnesic participants diverged in an important way. For confidence judgments, the amnesic participants, like the control and college participants, made more sure than unsure judgments to both words and nonwords. But for recollective judgments, amnesic participants did not produce the crossover interaction for words and nonwords. This striking difference between the performance of memory-intact and amnesic participants demonstrates that recollective judgments and confidence that accompany retrieval are not isomorphic psychological experiences.
进行了两项实验,以确定回忆体验是否与信心可区分开来。在实验1中,我们采用被试内设计对大学生被试进行测试,并重复了加德纳和贾瓦(1990)在被试间设计中的研究结果。我们观察到,对于单词,“记得”判断高于非单词,但对于非单词,“知道”判断高于单词。对于信心判断,我们在单词和非单词上都获得了更多“确定”而非“不确定”的反应。在实验2中,我们测试了失忆症被试和匹配的对照被试。对照被试产生了与大学生被试相同的结果模式,但失忆症被试的结果在一个重要方面出现了分歧。对于信心判断,失忆症被试与对照被试和大学生被试一样,对单词和非单词都做出了更多“确定”而非“不确定”的判断。但对于回忆判断,失忆症被试在单词和非单词上并未产生交叉交互作用。记忆正常和失忆症被试表现之间的这一显著差异表明,检索时伴随的回忆判断和信心并非同构的心理体验。