Accuracy of confidence ratings associated with general knowledge and eyewitness memory.

Perfect, Timothy J.; Watson, Emma; Wagstaff, Graham F.

doi:10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.144

Cited by 66 publications

(79 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A second example of this type of analysis comes from a paper by Perfect, Watson, and Wagstaff (1993). In this experiment, subjects either answered 35 general knowledge questions or watched a forensically relevant 30-minute clip (from the fi lm Midnight Express) and answered 35 questions about the clip.…”

Section: Between-subjects Correlationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Th en, Pearson product-moment correlation coeffi cients were calculated between confi dence and proportion correct for each individual subject. Perfect et al (1993) used the between-subjects approach to compare the confi dence-accuracy relation for general knowledge responses and for the forensically relevant responses. Th ey found that for general knowledge questions, there was a strong relation between confi dence and proportion correctsubjects who were more confi dent on average were also more accurate.…”

Section: Between-subjects Correlationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Curious Complexity between Confidence and Accuracy in Reports from Memory

Roediger¹,

Wixted²,

DeSoto³

2012

Memory and Law

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Th e relation between the probability of remembering an event and one's confi dence in it seems obvious: Th e more confi dent a person is in remembering an event, the more accurate he or she will be (and vice versa). Imagine giving people a series of events to remember every day for a week, say 10 per day. Th e events could be sentences such as "Th e hippie touched the debutante in the park" or "Th e policeman arrested the homeless woman near the movie theater." Th en, on the seventh day, people could be asked to recall (or recognize) all the sentences that had been presented that seventh day, and those from the third day of the experiment, and to rate the confi dence of each reported memory. It would surprise no one to learn that people would correctly remember more sentences from the seventh day than from the third day; surely they would be more accurate for the recent memories. In addition, there is no doubt that their confi dence would track their accuracy if confi dence were measured on, say, a 7-point rating scale (from 7 = sure the event happened to 1 = sure the event did not happen). People would be much more confi dent for the recently presented sentences than for those heard 4 days previously. Th e reason people can intuit the result of this experiment so accurately is that we essentially live this experiment every day of our lives. We can tell an inquirer what events happened to us today with reasonable accuracy and certainty, but if we are asked to retrieve events from a particular day even a few days ago, they would be much hazier to us-we would be less accurate and less confi dent.

show abstract

Section: Between-subjects Correlationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Between-subjects Correlationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Curious Complexity between Confidence and Accuracy in Reports from Memory

Roediger¹,

Wixted²,

DeSoto³

2012

Memory and Law

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, in the literature on calibration or the relationship between confidence and accuracy, some papers discuss the 'accuracy of knowledge' in various domains, by which the authors mean the percentage of true out of total answers volunteered (e.g. Perfect, Watson, & Wagstaff, 1993). Epistemologists might observe that the accuracy of knowledge, strictly speaking, would always have to be 100%; any false answer volunteered would be mere belief at best, and fail to count as knowledge in the first place.…”

Section: What the Two Disciplines Mean By 'Mental States' And 'Knowlementioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge as a Mental State

Nagel¹

2013

Oxford Studies in Epistemology Volume 4

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Baranski & Petrusic, 1995;Bornstein & Zickafoose, 1999;W.F. Brewer & Sampaio, 2006;Mengelkamp & Bannert, 2010;Migueles & García-Bajos, 2001;Perfect, Watson, & Wagstaff, 1993;Schneider & Laurion, 1993), thus limiting the generalization of results to other contexts, such as an initial police interrogation in which the goal is to determine what happened during the offense or crime and in which no alternative answers are provided. The cued recall test is more commonly used in these cases than the recognition test.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Confidence–Accuracy Calibration with General Knowledge and Eyewitness Memory Cued Recall Questions

Luna

Martín-Luengo

2011

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The confidence-accuracy relationship has primarily been studied through recognition tests and correlation analysis. However, cued recall is more ecological from a forensic perspective. Moreover, there may be more informative ways of analysing the confidence-accuracy relationship than correlations. In the present study, participants viewed a video of a bank robbery and were asked cued recall questions covering general knowledge and the video itself. Confidence ratings were collected, and correlations, calibration and discrimination measures were calculated. All measures indicated a strong confidence-accuracy relationship that was better for general knowledge than eyewitness memory questions. However, there were no differences in confidence ratings for correct answers, suggesting that the differences could be limited to the evaluation of incorrect answers. We concluded that confidence may be a good marker for accuracy with cued recall, but that further research using ecological tests and more informative data analysis techniques is needed.Confidence in answers has been studied as a possible predictor of actual performance. Research on the confidence-accuracy relationship has been conducted using both general knowledge and eyewitness memory questions. Studies involving general knowledge questions have primarily been aimed at testing hypotheses and theories about how metamemory judgments work, whereas studies posing eyewitness memory questions have focused on application, based on the hypothesis that in a forensic context, confidence in answers helps distinguish between correct and incorrect information in a police interrogation.However, research conducted to date on the confidenceaccuracy relationship has some important shortcomings. First, it has primarily made use of recognition memory tests (e.g.

show abstract

Accuracy of confidence ratings associated with general knowledge and eyewitness memory.

Cited by 66 publications

References 4 publications

The Curious Complexity between Confidence and Accuracy in Reports from Memory

The Curious Complexity between Confidence and Accuracy in Reports from Memory

Knowledge as a Mental State

Confidence–Accuracy Calibration with General Knowledge and Eyewitness Memory Cued Recall Questions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About