Mecklenbräuker S
Fachbereich I-Psychologie, Universität Trier, Germany.
Psychol Res. 1995;57(3-4):179-91. doi: 10.1007/BF00431279.
Previous experiments have shown that the procedure of questioning subjects retrospectively about the input and output status of information (input and output monitoring) is a useful method for assessing the awareness states of subjects during implicit and explicit memory tasks. The main purpose of the present study was to investigate whether the previous findings could be extended to other implicit and explicit memory tasks. We were especially interested in whether differences in input- and output-monitoring performance can be observed when both the implicit and explicit memory tasks are conceptual ones. In a final tet phase, the target items from the study phase and new distractor items were presented. In a recognition-like situation, subjects had to decide whether an item had been presented in the study phase (input status), as well as whether they had produced the item in the memory-test phase (output status). In all three experiments judgments about the input status-but only for those items that had been produced in the implicit or in the explicit memory test--were more precise after explicit than after implicit memory testings. This finding was not influenced by the distinction between perceptual and conceptual-memory tasks (Exp. 1), and was obtained under conditions in which the implicit and the explicit memory tasks were both conceptual and differed only in test instructions (Exps. 2 and 3). These results suggest that not only subjects performing a perceptual test of implicit memory, but also subjects in a conceptual implicit test were less aware of using information from a previous study episode than subjects who received memory instructions. It is concluded that requiring judgments about the input status of information is a good method for assessing subjects' test awareness and is preferable to the use of a questionnaire (Exp. 3). In contrast, in all three experiments no differences were found with the output-monitoring measure between implicit and explicit test conditions.
先前的实验表明，让受试者回顾性地询问信息的输入和输出状态（输入和输出监测）的程序，是评估受试者在隐性和显性记忆任务期间意识状态的一种有用方法。本研究的主要目的是调查先前的研究结果是否可以扩展到其他隐性和显性记忆任务。我们特别感兴趣的是，当隐性和显性记忆任务都是概念性任务时，是否能观察到输入和输出监测表现的差异。在最后一个测试阶段，呈现了学习阶段的目标项目和新的干扰项目。在类似识别的情境中，受试者必须判断一个项目是否在学习阶段出现过（输入状态），以及他们是否在记忆测试阶段产生过该项目（输出状态）。在所有三个实验中，关于输入状态的判断——但仅限于那些在隐性或显性记忆测试中产生过的项目——在显性记忆测试后比在隐性记忆测试后更准确。这一发现不受感知性和概念性记忆任务区分的影响（实验1），并且是在隐性和显性记忆任务都是概念性的且仅在测试指令上有所不同的条件下获得的（实验2和3）。这些结果表明，不仅进行隐性记忆感知测试的受试者，而且进行概念性隐性测试的受试者，比接受记忆指令的受试者更不意识到使用先前学习情节中的信息。得出的结论是，要求对信息的输入状态进行判断是评估受试者测试意识的一种好方法，并且比使用问卷更可取（实验3）。相比之下，在所有三个实验中，隐性和显性测试条件之间在输出监测测量上没有发现差异。
