School of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology, University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.
Psychon Bull Rev. 2023 Dec;30(6):2305-2314. doi: 10.3758/s13423-023-02289-z. Epub 2023 May 3.
The present study investigated whether we first remember an item (e.g., a word itself) and then its source (e.g., position on the screen) or whether the retrieval of item and source information can (partially) overlap. Participants were tested on the source either in immediate sequence to item recognition (as standard in source-monitoring research) or following as a separate block after full completion of the item recognition test to separate these processes in time, providing a baseline. Using the mouse-tracking procedure during the item and source tests, we analyzed how item and source decisions unfolded qualitatively over time. Despite no significant difference in the aggregated trajectory curvatures, more thorough analyses based on the individual trajectories revealed differences across the test formats. In the standard format, trajectories were less curved in the source than in the item test. In contrast, in the blocked format, this difference was in the other direction with source showing more curved trajectories than item. Alternative interpretations of mouse-trajectory curvatures on the source-monitoring paradigm and what their difference may imply for item and source processing are discussed.
本研究旨在探讨我们是先记住一个项目（例如，一个单词本身），然后再记住其来源（例如，屏幕上的位置），还是项目和来源信息的检索可以（部分）重叠。在对来源进行测试时，参与者要么在项目识别后立即进行（如来源监测研究中的标准），要么在完成项目识别测试后作为单独的块进行，以在时间上分开这些过程，提供基线。在项目和来源测试过程中使用鼠标跟踪程序，我们分析了项目和来源决策随时间推移的定性展开情况。尽管在聚合轨迹曲率方面没有显著差异，但基于个体轨迹的更深入分析揭示了不同测试格式之间的差异。在标准格式中，来源测试中的轨迹曲率小于项目测试中的轨迹曲率。相比之下，在分块格式中，情况则相反，来源测试中的轨迹曲率比项目测试中的曲率更大。对来源监测范式上鼠标轨迹曲率的替代解释及其对项目和来源处理的可能含义进行了讨论。
