Does Test Type Influence False Recognition in the DRM Paradigm? Comparison of the Yes/No Recognition Test and Two-Alternative Forced-Choice Test

Author:

Ulatowska Joanna1,Olszewska Justyna2,Hanson Matthew D.3

Affiliation:

1. Nicolaus Copernicus University

2. University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh, SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities

3. University at Albany

Abstract

Abstract Studies attempting to identify the mechanisms that are responsible for the level of false recognition in the DRM paradigm usually apply a manipulation during encoding. The main aim of the studies reported here was to investigate the within- and between-participant effects of a testing method on memory performance using a standard yes/no recognition test and a 2-alternative forced-choice recognition test (2FC). To allow a direct comparison of the 2 testing methods, a 2FC test containing similar items as a typical yes/no test in the DRM paradigm was elaborated on in the pilot study. Moreover, 2 methods of data calculation were used: comparing rates of hit and false alarms with critical lures and with unstudied and unrelated items between the 2 tests and comparing measures of sensitivity (d’) derived from signal detection theory. Both experiments showed a lower false alarm rate to critical lures and higher hit rate in a 2FC test as compared with a yes/no test, depicting a typical mirror effect. A within-participant design (Experiment 1) also showed that this increased accuracy of a 2FC test diminished when memory performance was expressed in terms of a sensitivity measure, which may suggest that similar processes are used during these 2 retrieval methods. A similar analysis performed for a between-participants design (Experiment 2) revealed that a 2FC test was less susceptible to associative memory distortions, but the quality of memory (“remember/know” judgments) remained similar for both tests.

Publisher

University of Illinois Press

Subject

Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Developmental and Educational Psychology,Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3