Remember-Know: A Matter of Confidence
This article critically examines the view that the signal detection theory (SDT) interpretation of the remember-know (RK) paradigm has been ruled out by the evidence. The author evaluates 5 empirical arguments against a database of 72 studies reporting RK data under 400 different conditions. These a...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Psychological review 2004-04, Vol.111 (2), p.524-542 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 542 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 524 |
| container_title | Psychological review |
| container_volume | 111 |
| creator | Dunn, John C |
| description | This article critically examines the view that the signal detection theory (SDT) interpretation of the remember-know (RK) paradigm has been ruled out by the evidence. The author evaluates 5 empirical arguments against a database of 72 studies reporting RK data under 400 different conditions. These arguments concern (a) the functional independence of remember and know rates, (b) the invariance of estimates of sensitivity, (c) the relationship between remember rates and overall hit and false alarm rates, (d) the relationship between RK responses and confidence judgments, and (e) dissociations between remember and overall hit rates. Each of these arguments is shown to be flawed, and despite being open to refutation, the SDT interpretation is consistent with existing data from both the RK and remember-know-guess paradigms and offers a basis for further theoretical development. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1037/0033-295X.111.2.524 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71812299</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ688610</ericid><sourcerecordid>614403654</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a467t-ba1be89e40a2eb8596742050a4c7b0c31ee49daf3e3b9423d15874d3edcf21443</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE1LAzEQhoMoWrW_QPEg6G1rJsnm4yilfhYEUfAWstlZWNnt1qSr-O9NaaniQeeSwzzzzuQh5AjoCChXF5RynjGTv4wAYMRGORNbZACGmwyEgm0y2BB7ZD_GV5oKjNkle5BTmRsGAzJ8xBbbAkN2P-s-DslO5ZqIw_V7QJ6vJk_jm2z6cH07vpxmTki1yAoHBWqDgjqGhc6NVILRnDrhVUE9B0RhSldx5IURjJeQayVKjqWvGAjBD8j5Knceurce48K2dfTYNG6GXR-tAg2MGfMvyJVWKgUm8PQX-Nr1YZY-YWXaSLnMxV9QOouB1kwniK8gH7oYA1Z2HurWhU8L1C7F26VWu9Rqk3jLbBKfpk7W0X3RYvk9szadgLM14KJ3TRXczNfxBye5BK0Sd7ziMNR-057cSa1l2r6JcXNn5_HTu7CofYPRBnz_cc8XqSKccg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>614403654</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Remember-Know: A Matter of Confidence</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES</source><creator>Dunn, John C</creator><creatorcontrib>Dunn, John C</creatorcontrib><description>This article critically examines the view that the signal detection theory (SDT) interpretation of the remember-know (RK) paradigm has been ruled out by the evidence. The author evaluates 5 empirical arguments against a database of 72 studies reporting RK data under 400 different conditions. These arguments concern (a) the functional independence of remember and know rates, (b) the invariance of estimates of sensitivity, (c) the relationship between remember rates and overall hit and false alarm rates, (d) the relationship between RK responses and confidence judgments, and (e) dissociations between remember and overall hit rates. Each of these arguments is shown to be flawed, and despite being open to refutation, the SDT interpretation is consistent with existing data from both the RK and remember-know-guess paradigms and offers a basis for further theoretical development.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0033-295X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-1471</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.111.2.524</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15065921</identifier><identifier>CODEN: PSRVAX</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington, DC: American Psychological Association</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Cognition ; Cognitive psychology ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Human ; Humans ; Judgment ; Knowledge Level ; Learning ; Learning. Memory ; Measures (Individuals) ; Memory ; Models, Psychological ; Psychological Theory ; Psychology ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Psychology. Psychophysiology ; Recall (Learning) ; Responses ; Signal Detection (Perception) ; Signal Detection, Psychological ; Theories ; Theory</subject><ispartof>Psychological review, 2004-04, Vol.111 (2), p.524-542</ispartof><rights>2004 American Psychological Association</rights><rights>2004 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright American Psychological Association Apr 2004</rights><rights>2004, American Psychological Association</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a467t-ba1be89e40a2eb8596742050a4c7b0c31ee49daf3e3b9423d15874d3edcf21443</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a467t-ba1be89e40a2eb8596742050a4c7b0c31ee49daf3e3b9423d15874d3edcf21443</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ688610$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=15636187$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15065921$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dunn, John C</creatorcontrib><title>Remember-Know: A Matter of Confidence</title><title>Psychological review</title><addtitle>Psychol Rev</addtitle><description>This article critically examines the view that the signal detection theory (SDT) interpretation of the remember-know (RK) paradigm has been ruled out by the evidence. The author evaluates 5 empirical arguments against a database of 72 studies reporting RK data under 400 different conditions. These arguments concern (a) the functional independence of remember and know rates, (b) the invariance of estimates of sensitivity, (c) the relationship between remember rates and overall hit and false alarm rates, (d) the relationship between RK responses and confidence judgments, and (e) dissociations between remember and overall hit rates. Each of these arguments is shown to be flawed, and despite being open to refutation, the SDT interpretation is consistent with existing data from both the RK and remember-know-guess paradigms and offers a basis for further theoretical development.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cognition</subject><subject>Cognitive psychology</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Judgment</subject><subject>Knowledge Level</subject><subject>Learning</subject><subject>Learning. Memory</subject><subject>Measures (Individuals)</subject><subject>Memory</subject><subject>Models, Psychological</subject><subject>Psychological Theory</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychophysiology</subject><subject>Recall (Learning)</subject><subject>Responses</subject><subject>Signal Detection (Perception)</subject><subject>Signal Detection, Psychological</subject><subject>Theories</subject><subject>Theory</subject><issn>0033-295X</issn><issn>1939-1471</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkE1LAzEQhoMoWrW_QPEg6G1rJsnm4yilfhYEUfAWstlZWNnt1qSr-O9NaaniQeeSwzzzzuQh5AjoCChXF5RynjGTv4wAYMRGORNbZACGmwyEgm0y2BB7ZD_GV5oKjNkle5BTmRsGAzJ8xBbbAkN2P-s-DslO5ZqIw_V7QJ6vJk_jm2z6cH07vpxmTki1yAoHBWqDgjqGhc6NVILRnDrhVUE9B0RhSldx5IURjJeQayVKjqWvGAjBD8j5Knceurce48K2dfTYNG6GXR-tAg2MGfMvyJVWKgUm8PQX-Nr1YZY-YWXaSLnMxV9QOouB1kwniK8gH7oYA1Z2HurWhU8L1C7F26VWu9Rqk3jLbBKfpk7W0X3RYvk9szadgLM14KJ3TRXczNfxBye5BK0Sd7ziMNR-057cSa1l2r6JcXNn5_HTu7CofYPRBnz_cc8XqSKccg</recordid><startdate>20040401</startdate><enddate>20040401</enddate><creator>Dunn, John C</creator><general>American Psychological Association</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>7RZ</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20040401</creationdate><title>Remember-Know</title><author>Dunn, John C</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a467t-ba1be89e40a2eb8596742050a4c7b0c31ee49daf3e3b9423d15874d3edcf21443</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cognition</topic><topic>Cognitive psychology</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Judgment</topic><topic>Knowledge Level</topic><topic>Learning</topic><topic>Learning. Memory</topic><topic>Measures (Individuals)</topic><topic>Memory</topic><topic>Models, Psychological</topic><topic>Psychological Theory</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychophysiology</topic><topic>Recall (Learning)</topic><topic>Responses</topic><topic>Signal Detection (Perception)</topic><topic>Signal Detection, Psychological</topic><topic>Theories</topic><topic>Theory</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dunn, John C</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>APA PsycArticles®</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Psychological review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dunn, John C</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ688610</ericid><atitle>Remember-Know: A Matter of Confidence</atitle><jtitle>Psychological review</jtitle><addtitle>Psychol Rev</addtitle><date>2004-04-01</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>111</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>524</spage><epage>542</epage><pages>524-542</pages><issn>0033-295X</issn><eissn>1939-1471</eissn><coden>PSRVAX</coden><abstract>This article critically examines the view that the signal detection theory (SDT) interpretation of the remember-know (RK) paradigm has been ruled out by the evidence. The author evaluates 5 empirical arguments against a database of 72 studies reporting RK data under 400 different conditions. These arguments concern (a) the functional independence of remember and know rates, (b) the invariance of estimates of sensitivity, (c) the relationship between remember rates and overall hit and false alarm rates, (d) the relationship between RK responses and confidence judgments, and (e) dissociations between remember and overall hit rates. Each of these arguments is shown to be flawed, and despite being open to refutation, the SDT interpretation is consistent with existing data from both the RK and remember-know-guess paradigms and offers a basis for further theoretical development.</abstract><cop>Washington, DC</cop><pub>American Psychological Association</pub><pmid>15065921</pmid><doi>10.1037/0033-295X.111.2.524</doi><tpages>19</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0033-295X |
| ispartof | Psychological review, 2004-04, Vol.111 (2), p.524-542 |
| issn | 0033-295X 1939-1471 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71812299 |
| source | MEDLINE; EBSCOhost APA PsycARTICLES |
| subjects | Biological and medical sciences Cognition Cognitive psychology Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Human Humans Judgment Knowledge Level Learning Learning. Memory Measures (Individuals) Memory Models, Psychological Psychological Theory Psychology Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry Psychology. Psychophysiology Recall (Learning) Responses Signal Detection (Perception) Signal Detection, Psychological Theories Theory |
| title | Remember-Know: A Matter of Confidence |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-25T15%3A40%3A10IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Remember-Know:%20A%20Matter%20of%20Confidence&rft.jtitle=Psychological%20review&rft.au=Dunn,%20John%20C&rft.date=2004-04-01&rft.volume=111&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=524&rft.epage=542&rft.pages=524-542&rft.issn=0033-295X&rft.eissn=1939-1471&rft.coden=PSRVAX&rft_id=info:doi/10.1037/0033-295X.111.2.524&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E614403654%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=614403654&rft_id=info:pmid/15065921&rft_ericid=EJ688610&rfr_iscdi=true |