Literature DB >> 28054811

Overdistribution illusions: Categorical judgments produce them, confidence ratings reduce them.

C J Brainerd1, K Nakamura1, V F Reyna1, R E Holliday2.   

Abstract

Overdistribution is a form of memory distortion in which an event is remembered as belonging to too many episodic states, states that are logically or empirically incompatible with each other. We investigated a response formatting method of suppressing 2 basic types of overdistribution, disjunction and conjunction illusions, which parallel some classic illusions in the judgment and decision making literature. In this method, subjects respond to memory probes by rating their confidence that test cues belong to specific episodic states (e.g., presented on List 1, presented on List 2), rather than by making the usual categorical judgments about those states. The central prediction, which was derived from the task calibration principle of fuzzy-trace theory, was that confidence ratings should reduce overdistribution by diminishing subjects' reliance on noncompensatory gist memories. The data of 3 experiments agreed with that prediction. In Experiment 1, there were reliable disjunction illusions with categorical judgments but not with confidence ratings. In Experiment 2, both response formats produced reliable disjunction illusions, but those for confidence ratings were much smaller than those for categorical judgments. In Experiment 3, there were reliable conjunction illusions with categorical judgments but not with confidence ratings. Apropos of recent controversies over confidence-accuracy correlations in memory, such correlations were positive for hits, negative for correct rejections, and the 2 types of correlations were of equal magnitude. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28054811      PMCID: PMC5301261          DOI: 10.1037/xge0000242

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen        ISSN: 0022-1015


  54 in total

1.  Memory for multidimensional source information.

Authors:  Thorsten Meiser; Arndt Bröder
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 3.051

2.  The Effects of Framing, Reflection, Probability, and Payoff on Risk Preference in Choice Tasks.

Authors: 
Journal:  Organ Behav Hum Decis Process       Date:  1999-06

3.  Older adults encode--but do not always use--perceptual details: intentional versus unintentional effects of detail on memory judgments.

Authors:  Wilma Koutstaal
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2003-03

4.  Robust recollection rejection in the memory conjunction paradigm.

Authors:  James M Lampinen; Timothy N Odegard; Jeffrey S Neuschatz
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 3.051

5.  Overdistribution in source memory.

Authors:  C J Brainerd; V F Reyna; R E Holliday; K Nakamura
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2011-09-26       Impact factor: 3.051

6.  Explaining contradictory relations between risk perception and risk taking.

Authors:  Britain Mills; Valerie F Reyna; Steven Estrada
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2008-05

7.  The mirror effect in recognition memory: data and theory.

Authors:  M Glanzer; J K Adams
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 3.051

8.  On the development of conscious and unconscious memory.

Authors:  C J Brainerd; L M Stein; V F Reyna
Journal:  Dev Psychol       Date:  1998-03

9.  Individual Differences in Base Rate Neglect: A Fuzzy Processing Preference Index.

Authors:  Christopher R Wolfe; Christopher R Fisher
Journal:  Learn Individ Differ       Date:  2013-06-01

10.  Reintroducing the Concept of Complementarity into Psychology.

Authors:  Zheng Wang; Jerome Busemeyer
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-11-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.