Judgments of remembering: The revelation effect in children and adults

Guttentag, Robert E.; Dunn, Jennifer R.

doi:10.1016/s0022-0965(03)00135-8

Cited by 24 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In most revelation studies, the effect is greater for new items than for old (see Guttentag & Dunn, 2003;Hicks & Marsh, 1998;). However, in Experiment 2, the standard interaction pattern was reversed.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditions affecting the revelation effect for autobiographical memory

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditions affecting the revelation effect for autobiographical memory

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…People process the actual outcome to a problem fluently, and mistake this fluency for evidence that they must have known the outcome all along. To date, there is ample work involving fluency misattribution in adults, although little is known about its development in children (see Guttentag & Dunn, 2003).…”

Section: Mechanisms Contributing To Hindsight Bias and Similar Problementioning

confidence: 99%

What Can Children Tell Us About Hindsight Bias: A Fundamental Constraint on Perspective–Taking?

Birch

Bernstein²

2007

Social Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The second potential confound regarded participant age. Although most studies provided only a crude indicator of age (e.g., Bundergraduates^), some studies specifically investigated the revelation effect for varying age groups (Guttentag & Dunn, 2003;Hodgson, n.d.;Prull et al, 1998;Thapar & Sniezek, 2008). We found that six out of 10 effect sizes for elderly participants were negative.…”

Section: Potential Confoundsmentioning

confidence: 81%

The revelation effect: A meta-analytic test of hypotheses

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Judgments can depend on the activity directly preceding them. An example is the revelation effect whereby participants are more likely to claim that a stimulus is familiar after a preceding task, such as solving an anagram, than without a preceding task. We test conflicting predictions of four revelation-effect hypotheses in a meta-analysis of 26 years of revelation-effect research. The hypotheses' predictions refer to three subject areas: (1) the basis of judgments that are subject to the revelation effect (recollection vs. familiarity vs. fluency), (2) the degree of similarity between the task and test item, and (3) the difficulty of the preceding task. We use a hierarchical multivariate meta-analysis to account for dependent effect sizes and variance in experimental procedures. We test the revelation-effect hypotheses with a model selection procedure, where each model corresponds to a prediction of a revelation-effect hypothesis. We further quantify the amount of evidence for one model compared to another with Bayes factors. The results of this analysis suggest that none of the extant revelation-effect hypotheses can fully account for the data. The general vagueness of revelation-effect hypotheses and the scarcity of data were the major limiting factors in our analyses, emphasizing the need for formalized theories and further research into the puzzling revelation effect.

show abstract

Judgments of remembering: The revelation effect in children and adults

Cited by 24 publications

References 51 publications

Conditions affecting the revelation effect for autobiographical memory

Conditions affecting the revelation effect for autobiographical memory

What Can Children Tell Us About Hindsight Bias: A Fundamental Constraint on Perspective–Taking?

The revelation effect: A meta-analytic test of hypotheses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About