Malejka Simone, Bröder Arndt
Department of Psychology, University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.
Mem Cognit. 2016 Jan;44(1):63-72. doi: 10.3758/s13421-015-0549-8.
In a recent empirical study, Starns, Hicks, Brown, and Martin (Memory & Cognition, 36, 1-8 2008) collected source judgments for old items that participants had claimed to be new and found residual source discriminability depending on the old-new response bias. The authors interpreted their finding as evidence in favor of the bivariate signal-detection model, but against the two-high-threshold model of item/source memory. According to the latter, NEW responses only follow from the state of old-new uncertainty for which no source discrimination is possible, and the probability of entering this state is independent of the old-new response bias. However, when missed old items were presented for source discrimination, the participants could infer that the items had been previously studied. To test whether this implicit feedback led to second retrieval attempts and thus to source memory for presumably unrecognized items, we replicated Starns et al.'s (Memory & Cognition, 36, 1-8 2008) finding and compared their procedure to a procedure without such feedback. Our results challenge the conclusion to abandon discrete processing in source memory; source memory for unrecognized items is probably an artifact of the procedure, by which implicit feedback prompts participants to reconsider their recognition judgment when asked to rate the source of old items in the absence of item memory.
在最近的一项实证研究中,斯塔恩斯、希克斯、布朗和马丁(《记忆与认知》,第36卷,第1 - 8页,2008年)收集了参与者声称是新的旧项目的来源判断,并发现根据新旧反应偏差存在残留的来源辨别能力。作者将他们的发现解释为支持双变量信号检测模型的证据,但反对项目/来源记忆的双高阈值模型。根据后者,“新”反应仅源于新旧不确定性状态,对于这种状态不可能进行来源辨别,并且进入这种状态的概率与新旧反应偏差无关。然而,当呈现遗漏的旧项目进行来源辨别时,参与者可以推断这些项目之前已经被研究过。为了测试这种隐性反馈是否导致第二次检索尝试,从而导致对大概未被识别的项目的来源记忆,我们重复了斯塔恩斯等人(《记忆与认知》,第36卷,第1 - 8页,2008年)的发现,并将他们的程序与没有这种反馈的程序进行了比较。我们的结果对放弃来源记忆中的离散处理这一结论提出了挑战;对未被识别的项目的来源记忆可能是该程序的一个人为结果,通过这种程序,隐性反馈促使参与者在没有项目记忆的情况下被要求对旧项目的来源进行评分时重新考虑他们的识别判断。