2022
DOI: 10.1037/xge0001113
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Levels of specificity in episodic memory: Insights from response accuracy and subjective confidence ratings in older adults and in younger adults under full or divided attention.

Abstract: We propose that the specificity with which associations in episodic memory can be remembered varies on a continuum. In Experiment 1, we provide further evidence that older adults' deficits in associative memory scale with the amount of specificity that needs to be retrieved. In Experiment 2, we address whether depleted attentional resources, simulated in young adults under divided attention at encoding, could account for older adults' associative memory specificity deficits. Participants studied face-scene pai… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

7
41
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(48 citation statements)
references
References 69 publications
(195 reference statements)
7
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Indeed, there is considerable overlap in terms of variability in performance and in group-level means and 95% confidence intervals for the two sampling sites, in both groups, and for all probes. As reported in Greene et al, (2021), the only credible sampling site difference we obtained was for the Related-Specific probes: participants tested online were less likely to correctly endorse these probes as “recombined” than were participants tested in the laboratory. However, crucially, this effect did not interact with age, such that there was no credible evidence to suggest that this sampling site effect was larger or smaller in the older adults compared with the younger adults.…”
Section: An Example Of a Comparison Of Laboratory And Online Data Col...mentioning
confidence: 67%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Indeed, there is considerable overlap in terms of variability in performance and in group-level means and 95% confidence intervals for the two sampling sites, in both groups, and for all probes. As reported in Greene et al, (2021), the only credible sampling site difference we obtained was for the Related-Specific probes: participants tested online were less likely to correctly endorse these probes as “recombined” than were participants tested in the laboratory. However, crucially, this effect did not interact with age, such that there was no credible evidence to suggest that this sampling site effect was larger or smaller in the older adults compared with the younger adults.…”
Section: An Example Of a Comparison Of Laboratory And Online Data Col...mentioning
confidence: 67%
“…More recently, in Greene et al, (2021), we attempted in our first experiment to replicate this effect using a modified paradigm, in which participants make a two-choice discrimination (“intact” vs. “recombined” responses) to face-scene pairs that were old (i.e., Intact, such as an old man paired with a park scene with which he had originally appeared during the encoding phase of the experiment), highly similar but recombined (i.e., Related-Specific, such as the old man appearing with a different park scene than the one with which he had originally appeared during the encoding phase), somewhat less similar but recombined (i.e., Related-Broad, such as the old man appearing now with a forest, a different type of nature scene), and completely dissimilar but recombined (i.e., Unrelated, such as the old man appearing with a kitchen during the test phase, no longer a nature scene). After making an “intact” or “recombined” decision to each of the four types of test pairs described above, young and older adult participants were asked to rate their confidence in these decisions on a 3-point (“low,” “medium,” or “high”) scale.…”
Section: An Example Of a Comparison Of Laboratory And Online Data Col...mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations