Probing the origins of subjective confidence in source memory decisions in young and older adults: A sequential sampling account.

IF 3.7 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Kevin P Darby, Jessica N Gettleman, Chad S Dodson, Per B Sederberg
{"title":"Probing the origins of subjective confidence in source memory decisions in young and older adults: A sequential sampling account.","authors":"Kevin P Darby, Jessica N Gettleman, Chad S Dodson, Per B Sederberg","doi":"10.1037/xge0001680","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Subjective confidence is an important factor in our decision making, but how confidence arises is a matter of debate. A number of computational models have been proposed that integrate confidence into sequential sampling models of decision making, in which evidence accumulates across time to a threshold. An influential example of this approach is the relative balance of evidence hypothesis, in which confidence is determined by the amount of evidence for the choice that was made compared to the evidence for all possible choices. Here, we modify this approach by mapping distance from a decision threshold to confidence via a sigmoid function. This allows for individual differences in bias toward lower or higher levels of confidence, as well as sensitivity to differences in evidence between choices. We apply several variants of the model to assess potential age differences between young and older adults in source memory decision making in an existing data set (Dodson, Bawa, & Slotnick, 2007). We compare our model to the relative balance of evidence approach, and the results indicate that the sigmoidal method substantially improves model fit. We also consider models in which memory errors can arise from a misrecollection process that involves associating items with the incorrect source, a process that has been proposed to account for age differences in source memory confidence and accuracy, but find no evidence that misrecollection is necessary to account for the results. This work provides a viable model of subjective confidence that is integrated with well-established models of decision making and provides insights into effects of aging on source memory decisions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15698,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001680","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Subjective confidence is an important factor in our decision making, but how confidence arises is a matter of debate. A number of computational models have been proposed that integrate confidence into sequential sampling models of decision making, in which evidence accumulates across time to a threshold. An influential example of this approach is the relative balance of evidence hypothesis, in which confidence is determined by the amount of evidence for the choice that was made compared to the evidence for all possible choices. Here, we modify this approach by mapping distance from a decision threshold to confidence via a sigmoid function. This allows for individual differences in bias toward lower or higher levels of confidence, as well as sensitivity to differences in evidence between choices. We apply several variants of the model to assess potential age differences between young and older adults in source memory decision making in an existing data set (Dodson, Bawa, & Slotnick, 2007). We compare our model to the relative balance of evidence approach, and the results indicate that the sigmoidal method substantially improves model fit. We also consider models in which memory errors can arise from a misrecollection process that involves associating items with the incorrect source, a process that has been proposed to account for age differences in source memory confidence and accuracy, but find no evidence that misrecollection is necessary to account for the results. This work provides a viable model of subjective confidence that is integrated with well-established models of decision making and provides insights into effects of aging on source memory decisions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

主观信心是我们决策过程中的一个重要因素,但信心是如何产生的却是一个争论不休的问题。人们提出了许多计算模型,将信心融入决策的连续抽样模型中,其中证据会随着时间的推移累积到一个临界点。这种方法的一个有影响力的例子是证据相对平衡假说,在这种假说中,信心是由所做选择的证据量与所有可能选择的证据量相比而决定的。在这里,我们对这种方法进行了修改,通过一个 sigmoid 函数将决策阈值的距离映射为置信度。这就考虑到了个体对较低或较高置信度的偏好差异,以及对不同选择之间证据差异的敏感性。我们将该模型的几个变体应用于评估现有数据集(Dodson, Bawa, & Slotnick, 2007)中年轻人和老年人在源记忆决策方面的潜在年龄差异。我们将我们的模型与证据相对平衡法进行了比较,结果表明,正余弦法大大提高了模型的拟合度。我们还考虑了一些模型,在这些模型中,记忆错误可能来自于错误回忆过程,即把项目与错误来源联系起来,这一过程被认为可以解释来源记忆信心和准确性的年龄差异,但我们没有发现证据表明错误回忆是解释结果的必要条件。这项研究为主观信心提供了一个可行的模型,该模型与成熟的决策模型相结合,为了解衰老对来源记忆决策的影响提供了见解。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.90%
发文量
300
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychology: General publishes articles describing empirical work that bridges the traditional interests of two or more communities of psychology. The work may touch on issues dealt with in JEP: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, JEP: Human Perception and Performance, JEP: Animal Behavior Processes, or JEP: Applied, but may also concern issues in other subdisciplines of psychology, including social processes, developmental processes, psychopathology, neuroscience, or computational modeling. Articles in JEP: General may be longer than the usual journal publication if necessary, but shorter articles that bridge subdisciplines will also be considered.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信