Literature DB >> 24911135

Type I error inflation in the traditional by-participant analysis to metamemory accuracy: a generalized mixed-effects model perspective.

Kou Murayama1, Michiko Sakaki1, Veronica X Yan2, Garry M Smith3.   

Abstract

In order to examine metacognitive accuracy (i.e., the relationship between metacognitive judgment and memory performance), researchers often rely on by-participant analysis, where metacognitive accuracy (e.g., resolution, as measured by the gamma coefficient or signal detection measures) is computed for each participant and the computed values are entered into group-level statistical tests such as the t test. In the current work, we argue that the by-participant analysis, regardless of the accuracy measurements used, would produce a substantial inflation of Type I error rates when a random item effect is present. A mixed-effects model is proposed as a way to effectively address the issue, and our simulation studies examining Type I error rates indeed showed superior performance of mixed-effects model analysis as compared to the conventional by-participant analysis. We also present real data applications to illustrate further strengths of mixed-effects model analysis. Our findings imply that caution is needed when using the by-participant analysis, and recommend the mixed-effects model analysis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24911135     DOI: 10.1037/a0036914

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


  32 in total

1.  Unskilled but subjectively aware: Metacognitive monitoring ability and respective awareness in low-performing students.

Authors:  Marion Händel; Eva S Fritzsche
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2016-02

2.  Memory for Allergies and Health Foods: How Younger and Older Adults Strategically Remember Critical Health Information.

Authors:  Catherine D Middlebrooks; Shannon McGillivray; Kou Murayama; Alan D Castel
Journal:  J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci       Date:  2015-05-14       Impact factor: 4.077

3.  Individual differences in syntactic processing: Is there evidence for reader-text interactions?

Authors:  Ariel N James; Scott H Fraundorf; Eun-Kyung Lee; Duane G Watson
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2018-06-27       Impact factor: 3.059

4.  Is there more to metamemory? An argument for two specialized monitoring abilities.

Authors:  Ian M McDonough; Tasnuva Enam; Kyle R Kraemer; Deborah K Eakin; Minjung Kim
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2021-05-04

5.  The role of attention in remembering important item-location associations.

Authors:  Alexander L M Siegel; Alan D Castel
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2018-11

6.  Thirst for knowledge: The effects of curiosity and interest on memory in younger and older adults.

Authors:  Shannon McGillivray; Kou Murayama; Alan D Castel
Journal:  Psychol Aging       Date:  2015-10-19

7.  Younger and older adults weigh multiple cues in a similar manner to generate judgments of learning.

Authors:  Jarrod C Hines; Christopher Hertzog; Dayna R Touron
Journal:  Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn       Date:  2015-04-01

8.  The influences of valence and arousal on judgments of learning and on recall.

Authors:  Kathleen L Hourihan; Scott H Fraundorf; Aaron S Benjamin
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2017-01

9.  Test expectancy and memory for important information.

Authors:  Catherine D Middlebrooks; Kou Murayama; Alan D Castel
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2017-01-16       Impact factor: 3.051

10.  When enough is not enough: Information overload and metacognitive decisions to stop studying information.

Authors:  Kou Murayama; Adam B Blake; Tyson Kerr; Alan D Castel
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2015-11-23       Impact factor: 3.051

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.