conditions, tests of source memory show that Know judgments are generally associated with lesser degrees of recollection than Remember judgments, not with the absence of recollection (Johnson et al., 2009; Wais et al., 2008). Moreover, if recollection and familiarity are correlated processes, as seems likely, then Know judgments might be associated with lesser degrees of familiarity as well compared to Remember judgments. To address these issues, Old/New memory strength associated with Remember and Know judgments should at least be equated for confidence, a point made by Rotello and Zeng (2008) in their investigation in reaction times associated with Remember and Know judgments. As the large majority of Remember judgments are associated with high confidence, this may often entail using only high-confidence Old/New decisions, as we did in Experiments 1 and 2. Although the recommendation to equate confidence derives from the CDP model proposed in Figure 4, the selective use of high-confidence Know judgments (vs. high-confidence Remember judgments) should not be viewed as problematic from any dual-process perspective. In fact, standard Remember/Know instructions clearly stipulate that Know judgments should be given only when the participant has high-confidence that the item appeared on the list. Consider, for example, the instructions for Know judgments from Rajaram (1993), which are widely used: responses should be made when...you are of recognizing the words but these certain “Know” words fail to evoke any specific conscious recollection from the study list. [emphasis added] In practice, participants generally do not heed this instruction and instead tend to supply Know judgments when they are not certain of their decision. Thus, it makes sense to take
conditions, tests of source memory show that Know judgments are generally associated with lesser degrees of recollection than Remember judgments, not with the absence of recollection (Johnson et al., 2009; Wais et al., 2008). Moreover, if recollection and familiarity are correlated processes, as seems likely, then Know judgments might be associated with lesser degrees of familiarity as well compared to Remember judgments. To address these issues, Old/New memory strength associated with Remember and Know judgments should at least be equated for confidence, a point made by Rotello and Zeng (2008) in their investigation in reaction times associated with Remember and Know judgments. As the large majority of Remember judgments are associated with high confidence, this may often entail using only high-confidence Old/New decisions, as we did in Experiments 1 and 2. Although the recommendation to equate confidence derives from the CDP model proposed in Figure 4, the selective use of high-confidence Know judgments (vs. high-confidence Remember judgments) should not be viewed as problematic from any dual-process perspective. In fact, standard Remember/Know instructions clearly stipulate that Know judgments should be given only when the participant has high-confidence that the item appeared on the list. Consider, for example, the instructions for Know judgments from Rajaram (1993), which are widely used: “Know” responses should be made when...you are certain of recognizing the words but these words fail to evoke any specific conscious recollection from the study list. [emphasis added] In practice, participants generally do not heed this instruction and instead tend to supply Know judgments when they are not certain of their decision. Thus, it makes sense to take
CDP%20Model%20(final).docx