从重复事件实例中延迟识别项目的首要性(和再现性)效应。

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Memory Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-21 DOI:10.1080/09658211.2024.2354764
Eva Rubínová, Heather L Price
{"title":"从重复事件实例中延迟识别项目的首要性(和再现性)效应。","authors":"Eva Rubínová, Heather L Price","doi":"10.1080/09658211.2024.2354764","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In repeated-event paradigms where participants are asked to recall details of a sequence of similar instances they viewed/experienced previously, more accurate details are typically recalled from the first and final instances (i.e., long-term primacy and recency effects). Participants likely encode distinct attributes of details of the boundary instances that subsequently facilitate source monitoring. To date, most repeated event research has measured memory performance via free-/cued-recall paradigms; we examined delayed memory for repeated events using the recognition paradigm. In two preregistered experiments, participants viewed four videos, and after a delay completed a recognition task. In Experiment 1 (<i>N</i> = 168, between-subjects), participants decided whether an item was old (i.e., presented in any video) or new, or whether an item was presented in video 1/2/3/4 or was new. In Experiment 2 (<i>N</i> = 160, within-subjects), the old/new decision was followed by an instance attribution decision. Old items were recognised faster in the old/new task compared to the instance-attribution task. In the instance-attribution task, items from the boundary instances were accurately attributed faster compared to items from the middle instances. We found further evidence for primacy (and recency) effects in measures of confidence, memory judgments, recognition accuracy and discriminability, and confidence-accuracy calibration.</p>","PeriodicalId":18569,"journal":{"name":"Memory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Primacy (and recency) effects in delayed recognition of items from instances of repeated events.\",\"authors\":\"Eva Rubínová, Heather L Price\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09658211.2024.2354764\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In repeated-event paradigms where participants are asked to recall details of a sequence of similar instances they viewed/experienced previously, more accurate details are typically recalled from the first and final instances (i.e., long-term primacy and recency effects). Participants likely encode distinct attributes of details of the boundary instances that subsequently facilitate source monitoring. To date, most repeated event research has measured memory performance via free-/cued-recall paradigms; we examined delayed memory for repeated events using the recognition paradigm. In two preregistered experiments, participants viewed four videos, and after a delay completed a recognition task. In Experiment 1 (<i>N</i> = 168, between-subjects), participants decided whether an item was old (i.e., presented in any video) or new, or whether an item was presented in video 1/2/3/4 or was new. In Experiment 2 (<i>N</i> = 160, within-subjects), the old/new decision was followed by an instance attribution decision. Old items were recognised faster in the old/new task compared to the instance-attribution task. In the instance-attribution task, items from the boundary instances were accurately attributed faster compared to items from the middle instances. We found further evidence for primacy (and recency) effects in measures of confidence, memory judgments, recognition accuracy and discriminability, and confidence-accuracy calibration.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18569,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Memory\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Memory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2024.2354764\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2024.2354764","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在重复事件范式中,参与者被要求回忆他们之前观看/体验过的一系列类似实例的细节,通常会从第一个和最后一个实例中回忆出更准确的细节(即长期优先效应和再现效应)。参与者很可能编码了边界实例细节的不同属性,从而促进了源监测。迄今为止,大多数重复事件研究都是通过自由/唤回范式来测量记忆表现的;而我们则使用识别范式来研究重复事件的延迟记忆。在两个预先登记的实验中,参与者观看四段视频,并在延迟后完成识别任务。在实验 1(N = 168,被试间)中,被试决定一个项目是旧的(即在任何视频中出现过)还是新的,或者一个项目是在视频 1/2/3/4 中出现过还是新的。在实验 2(N = 160,被试内)中,新旧决定之后是实例归因决定。与实例归因任务相比,新旧任务中旧项目的识别速度更快。在实例归因任务中,边界实例中的项目比中间实例中的项目更快被准确归因。我们在信心测量、记忆判断、识别准确性和可辨别性以及信心-准确性校准中发现了更多关于优先(和追溯)效应的证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Primacy (and recency) effects in delayed recognition of items from instances of repeated events.

In repeated-event paradigms where participants are asked to recall details of a sequence of similar instances they viewed/experienced previously, more accurate details are typically recalled from the first and final instances (i.e., long-term primacy and recency effects). Participants likely encode distinct attributes of details of the boundary instances that subsequently facilitate source monitoring. To date, most repeated event research has measured memory performance via free-/cued-recall paradigms; we examined delayed memory for repeated events using the recognition paradigm. In two preregistered experiments, participants viewed four videos, and after a delay completed a recognition task. In Experiment 1 (N = 168, between-subjects), participants decided whether an item was old (i.e., presented in any video) or new, or whether an item was presented in video 1/2/3/4 or was new. In Experiment 2 (N = 160, within-subjects), the old/new decision was followed by an instance attribution decision. Old items were recognised faster in the old/new task compared to the instance-attribution task. In the instance-attribution task, items from the boundary instances were accurately attributed faster compared to items from the middle instances. We found further evidence for primacy (and recency) effects in measures of confidence, memory judgments, recognition accuracy and discriminability, and confidence-accuracy calibration.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Memory
Memory PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
79
期刊介绍: Memory publishes high quality papers in all areas of memory research. This includes experimental studies of memory (including laboratory-based research, everyday memory studies, and applied memory research), developmental, educational, neuropsychological, clinical and social research on memory. By representing all significant areas of memory research, the journal cuts across the traditional distinctions of psychological research. Memory therefore provides a unique venue for memory researchers to communicate their findings and ideas both to peers within their own research tradition in the study of memory, and also to the wider range of research communities with direct interest in human memory.
期刊最新文献
People experience similar intrusions about past and future autobiographical negative experiences. Comparison of working memory performance in athletes and non-athletes: a meta-analysis of behavioural studies. On the role of familiarity and developmental exposure in music-evoked autobiographical memories. Intrinsic functional connectivity in medial temporal lobe networks is associated with susceptibility to misinformation. Cross-cultural comparison of the neural correlates of true and false memory retrieval.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1