Literature DB >> 11294434

Conjoint recognition and phantom recollection.

C J Brainerd1, R Wright, V F Reyna, A H Mojardin.   

Abstract

A new methodology for measuring illusory conscious experience of the "presentation" of unstudied material (phantom recollection) is evaluated that extracts measurements directly from recognition responses, rather than indirectly from introspective reports. Application of this methodology in the Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm (Experiments 1 and 2) and in a more conventional paradigm (Experiment 3) showed that 2 processes (phantom recollection and familiarity) contribute to false recognition of semantically related distractors. Phantom recollection was the larger contributor to false recognition of critical distractors in the DRM paradigm, but surprisingly, it was also the larger contributor to false recognition of other types of distractors. Variability in false recognition was tied to variability in phantom recollection. Experimental control of phantom recollection was achieved with manipulations that were motivated by fuzzy-trace theory's hypothesis that the phenomenon is gist-based.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11294434     DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.27.2.307

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn        ISSN: 0278-7393            Impact factor:   3.051


  41 in total

1.  Factors that determine false recall: a multiple regression analysis.

Authors:  H L Roediger; J M Watson; K B McDermott; D A Gallo
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2001-09

2.  Backward associative strength determines source attributions given to false memories.

Authors:  Jason L Hicks; Thomas W Hancock
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-12

3.  The reliability of the DRM paradigm as a measure of individual differences in false memories.

Authors:  Irene V Blair; Alison P Lenton; Reid Hastie
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-09

4.  The effects of associations and aging on illusory recollection.

Authors:  David A Gallo; Henry L Roediger
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2003-10

5.  The effect of warnings on false memories in young and older adults.

Authors:  David P McCabe; Anderson D Smith
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2002-10

6.  Are false memories more difficult to forget than accurate memories? The effect of retention interval on recall and recognition.

Authors:  John G Seamon; Chun R Luo; Jonathan J Kopecky; Catherine A Price; Leeatt Rothschld; Nicholas S Fung; Michael A Schwartz
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2002-10

7.  Effects of perceptual modality on verbatim and gist memory.

Authors:  David R Gerkens; Steven M Smith
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-02

8.  Strategic processes in false recognition memory.

Authors:  Evan Heit; Noellie Brockdorff; Koen Lamberts
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-04

9.  Episodic generation can cause semantic forgetting: retrieval-induced forgetting of false memories.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Starns; Jason L Hicks
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2004-06

10.  The role of phantom recollection in false recall.

Authors:  Tammy A Marche; C J Brainerd
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2012-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.