2000
DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.26.6.1534
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Recollection and familiarity through the looking glass: When old does not mirror new.

Abstract: The authors use the qualitative differences logic to demonstrate that 2 separate memory influences underlie performance in recognition memory tasks, familiarity and recollection. The experiments focus on the mirror effect, the finding that more memorable stimulus classes produce higher hit rates but lower false-alarm rates than less memorable stimulus classes. The authors demonstrate across a number of experiments that manipulations assumed to decrease recollection eliminate or even reverse the hit-rate portio… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

14
209
2

Year Published

2002
2002
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 125 publications
(225 citation statements)
references
References 76 publications
(168 reference statements)
14
209
2
Order By: Relevance
“…In the present experiments, we provided evidence consistent with this hypothesis in terms of the characteristics of the old-similar ROC curves. The analysis of the characteristics of these curves indicated greater ability to recollect low-frequency items than high-frequency items, precisely the result predicted by dual-process explanations of the word-frequency effect (Joordens & Hockley, 2000;Reder et al, 2000). Further, these dual-process models propose that familiarity differences lead to the false-alarm portion of the word-frequency effect.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 61%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…In the present experiments, we provided evidence consistent with this hypothesis in terms of the characteristics of the old-similar ROC curves. The analysis of the characteristics of these curves indicated greater ability to recollect low-frequency items than high-frequency items, precisely the result predicted by dual-process explanations of the word-frequency effect (Joordens & Hockley, 2000;Reder et al, 2000). Further, these dual-process models propose that familiarity differences lead to the false-alarm portion of the word-frequency effect.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 61%
“…On the basis of these data, theories of recognition memory must explain why discrimination between studied and unstudied items was better for low-than for high-frequency items regardless of whether the discrimination was relatively easy (old-new recognition) or difficult (old-similar recognition). Taking into account the characteristics of old-new and old-similar discrimination, as well as the manner in which such discrimination performance varied as a function of word frequency, these data favor a dual-process interpretation (e.g., Joordens & Hockley, 2000;Mandler, 1980;Reder et al, 2000;Yonelinas, 1994). Predicted receiver operating characteristic (ROC; left column) z-transformed ROC (z-ROC; right column) curves for single-process models (top row), high threshold models (second row), dual-process models (third row), and dual threshold models (bottom row).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations