Aging, Source, and Decision Criteria: When False Fame Errors Do and Do Not Occur

Multhaup, Kristi S.

doi:10.1037/e537272012-329

Cited by 72 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This added option might reduce conjunction errors, perhaps by encouraging a more stringent criterion for identifying items (cf. Multhaup, 1995). Though response option was not explicitly manipulated in the current study, both younger and older adults still exhibited relatively high levels of false alarms to conjunction pairs, despite having the option to identify these pairs as separate.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Associative recognition of face pairs by younger and older adults: The role of familiarity-based processing.

Rhodes

Castel²,

Jacoby³

2008

Psychology and Aging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research suggested that older adults have a specific impairment in remembering verbal associative information, but it is unclear how elaboration and familiarity might influence this deficit in situations that involve perceptual processing. In the present experiments, younger and older participants studied male-female pairs of faces. Participants were then administered an associative recognition test consisting of previously studied pairs, pairs that contained previously studied items that were not studied together (i.e., conjunction pairs), and entirely new pairs of faces, and participants were instructed to identify pairs that had been presented together at study. Overall, participants were successful at recognizing previously presented pairs but were highly likely to mistakenly endorse conjunction pairs. This pattern was more pronounced for older adults, especially when items were repeated at encoding. Such data suggest that memory for face pairs relies largely on the familiarity of each face and not on a more precise recollection of associative information.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Associative recognition of face pairs by younger and older adults: The role of familiarity-based processing.

Rhodes

Castel²,

Jacoby³

2008

Psychology and Aging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, when older adults are encouraged to focus on factual rather than affective features of their memories, the age deficit in source accuracy is diminished (Hashtroudi et al, 1994), as it is when relatively more personally engaging information is judged (Brown et al, 1995). Additionally, age-related source deficits can be reduced when older people are induced to rely on more stringent or specific criteria to evaluate the source of their memories (Multhaup, 1995). Future research in which binding and evaluative conditions are manipulated and brain activity of both younger and older adults is assessed through electrophysiological or brainimaging techniques (e.g., Johnson, 1997b;Johnson, Kounios, et al, 1996) would help verify and extend our findings.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, in the current study, the MCQ ratings were made separately after all source judgments were complete and thus could not have influenced source accuracy. (For other results showing the beneficial effect of more specific source evaluation, see Dodson & Johnson, 1993;Lindsay & Johnson, 1989;Multhaup, 1995;Zaragoza & Lane, 1994.) Presumably, weighting features and setting such criteria appropriately for a given task involves frontal functions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet older adults' source accuracy was more impaired than that of younger adults. However, because the MCQ was given after the source test was completed, one possibility is that at the 15-min interval, older adults had information (as assessed by the MCQ) that they did not use on the source test, accounting for their lower source performance (see also Multhaup, 1995). Alternatively (or in addition), the features assessed by our abbreviated MCQ may not have included all the features that distinguish the quality of the memories of younger and older adults.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Aging and source monitoring: Cognitive processes and neuropsychological correlates.

Henkel

Johnson²,

Leonardis³

1998

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

263

229

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study shows that relative to younger adults, older adults are more adversely influenced by similar items when judging a memory's source, and the phenomenal features of their correctly and incorrectly attributed memories have greater overlap. The authors argue in accordance with the source monitoring framework that this age-related impairment in source accuracy is related to processes involved in binding features into complex memories and those involved in accessing and evaluating contextual features of memories. These processes are linked to medial temporal and frontal brain regions, respectively, as evidenced by correlations in older adults between source accuracy and neuropsychological tests often used to assess medial temporal and frontal function. The results suggest that adequate feature binding is particularly important when items from different sources share similar features and access-evaluation processes are particularly important after a delay.

show abstract

“…Although source-monitoring errors can arise from greater overlap among memory representations, they can also occur if the decision processes that inspect these memorial records are biased or inaccurate. In general, decision processes vary in terms ofthe amount and kind of information that is needed in order to make a source ascription (Dodson & Johnson, 1996;Multhaup, 1995). In terms of amount, decisions can be made quickly and heuristically or they can be made slowly and deliberately (Johnson et aI., 1993).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Monitoring source in an unconscious plagiarism paradigm

Landau

Marsh

1997

Psychon Bull Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current laboratory paradigms used to assess unconscious plagiarism consist of three tasks. First, participants generate solutions to a puzzle task with a partner (initial generation task); second, they recall their individual contribution (recall-own task); and third, they attempt to create new solutions that were not offered previously (generate-new task). An analysis of these tasks indicated that they differ in terms of the source monitoring they require. The two generative tasks require less differentiated information (e.g., familiarity) and relatively lax decision criteria. The recall-own task, however, demands more differentiated information and more extended decision criteria. In two experiments, factors known to influence source monitoring were manipulated. Consistent with the analysis, no effects were associated with the generative tasks. Recall-own plagiarisms increased when self-and other-generated solutions were difficult to distinguish (Experiment 1) and decreased when the two sources were easier to distinguish (Experiment 2).Offering an idea or a solution to a problem under the belief that it is one's novel contribution, when that idea or solution has actually been encountered earlier, constitutes cryptomnesia, or unconscious plagiarism (Taylor, 1965). Currently, two paradigms have been used successfully to study the laboratory analogue of unconscious plagiarism. The first, developed by Brown and Murphy (1989), assessed unconscious plagiarism in a category generation paradigm that consisted of three sequential tasks. The first task (called initial generation) required participants to take turns in groups of 4, generating exemplars from four categories (e.g., musical instruments, sports, etc.). Each participant offered four exemplars per category in a round-robin fashion under the admonition to avoid repeating another person's responses. In the two subsequent tasks. participants attempted to recall the exemplars that they had offered (recall-own task) and to generate new exemplars that had not been offered earlier by themselves or by their fellow group members (generate-new task). Because of the admonition instruction, plagiarisms were counted in the initial generation and generate-new tasks whenever a participant offered an exemplar that had already been given. In the recall-own task, plagiarisms occurred whenever a participant claimed to have generated an exemplar that had been offered by another group member. In all three tasks, the proportion of plagiarized responses was substantial and varied with manipulations such as task difficulty (e.g.,

show abstract

Aging, Source, and Decision Criteria: When False Fame Errors Do and Do Not Occur

Cited by 72 publications

References 0 publications

Associative recognition of face pairs by younger and older adults: The role of familiarity-based processing.

Associative recognition of face pairs by younger and older adults: The role of familiarity-based processing.

Aging and source monitoring: Cognitive processes and neuropsychological correlates.

Monitoring source in an unconscious plagiarism paradigm

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About