Latent mnemonic strengths are latent: a comment on Mickes, Wixted, and Wais (2007).

Mickes, Wixted, and Wais (2007) proposed a simple test of latent strength variability in recognition memory. They asked participants to rate their confidence using either a 20-point or a 99-point strength scale and plotted distributions of the resulting ratings. They found 25% more variability in ratings for studied than for new items, which they interpreted as providing evidence that latent mnemonic strength distributions are 25% more variable for studied than for new items. We show here that this conclusion is critically dependent on assumptions--so much so that these assumptions determine the conclusions. In fact, opposite conclusions, such that study does not affect the variability of latent strength, may be reached by making different but equally plausible assumptions. Because all measurements of mnemonic strength variability are critically dependent on untestable assumptions, all are arbitrary. Hence, there is no principled method for assessing the relative variability of latent mnemonic strength distributions.