Individual differences in shifting decision criterion: A recognition memory study

Abstract

An ability to flexibly shift a decision criterion can be advantageous. For example, a known change in the base rate of targets and distractors on a recognition memory test will lead optimal decision makers to shift their criterion accordingly. In the present study, 95 individuals participated in two recognition memory tests that included periodic changes in the base rate probability that the test stimulus had been presented during the study session. The results reveal a wide variability in the tendency to shift decision criterion in response to this probability information, with some appropriately shifting and others not shifting at all. However, participants were highly reliable in their tendency to shift criterion across tests. The goal of the present study was to explain what factors account for these individual differences. To accomplish this, over 50 variables were assessed for each individual (e.g., personality, cognitive style, state of mind). Using a regression model that incorporated different sets of factors, over 50% of the variance was accounted for. The results of the analysis describe the total, direct, and mediating effects on criterion shifting from factors that include memory strength, strategy, and inherent characteristics such as a fun-seeking personality, a negative affect, and military rank. The results are discussed with respect to understanding why participants rarely chose an optimal decision-making strategy and provide greater insight into the underlying mechanisms of recognition memory.

Response bias in recognition memory as a cognitive trait

“…Similarly, the remarkable unwillingness of participants to exercise appropriate levels of bias even when they are aware that test lists are composed only of targets or lures (J. C. Cox & Dobbins, 2011) might be explained in part by such an anchoring effect. Even when manipulations such as feedback, instructional motivation, and payoffs are successful in moving response bias, such shifts are usually suboptimal (e.g., Aminoff et al, 2012), another potential influence of trait bias.…”

The reliability of criterion shifting in recognition memory is task dependent

“…Nonetheless, the amount of shifting was correlated across different tests and stimuli within the same experimental session. According to Aminoff et al (2012). this finding Blikely reflects a general tendency in the flexibility of criterion shifting^(p. 1025).…”

“…It is not uncommon for researchers to conduct multiple experiments examining criterion shifts only to find null effects, small effects, or both (e.g., Bruno et al, 2009;Hicks & Starns, 2014;Verde & Rotello, 2007). One reason for these mixed outcomes could be large individual differences in the amount that people are willing to shift their criterion (Aminoff et al, 2012). For example, suppose that slightly less than half of participants in an experiment show a small to moderate amount of shifting, whereas the majority of participants show absolutely no criterion shift.…”

“…The authors interpreted this finding as criterion setting reflecting a cognitive trait such that individuals naturally differ in the amount of memorial evidence they need to classify items as old (see also Kantner & Lindsay, 2014). Aminoff et al (2012) explored criterion shifts using a target probability, or base rate, manipulation at test and found considerable variability in the magnitude at which people were willing to shift their criterion within a single test. Some people shifted a great deal whereas others did not.…”

“…We explored Aminoff et al's (2012) claim by investigating two primary research questions. First, are criterion shifts reliable across study-test cycles when participants attempt to shift their criterion in response to cues of expected memory strength rather than to probability cues?…”