Recognition-memory asymmetries predicted by individual item memorability.

IF 3.7 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Igor Utochkin, Nicholas Chiang, Wilma A Bainbridge
{"title":"Recognition-memory asymmetries predicted by individual item memorability.","authors":"Igor Utochkin, Nicholas Chiang, Wilma A Bainbridge","doi":"10.1037/xge0002003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>According to current recognition-memory theories, a major source of confusion when people judge which stimuli they remember is the contextual similarity of those stimuli to those from the studied list. However, these theories overlook the potential for confusions to arise from item-specific memorability properties not explained by list properties-namely, the likelihood that a stimulus will be correctly recognized if studied (\"hittability\") or falsely recognized if not (\"false alarmability\")-independent of contextual similarity. Here, we introduce a memorability continuum model based on signal detection theory. The model predicts that differences in the individual \"hittability\" and \"false alarmability\" of arbitrary Items A and B grounded in their representational locations on an internal familiarity axis can often lead to asymmetric recognition performance in a forced-choice task such that recognition of Target A over Foil B is more accurate than recognition of Target B over Foil A. In a forced-choice experiment testing memory for real-world object images, the model successfully predicted specific item pair asymmetries. Using deep convolutional neural networks validated on human similarity judgments, we showed that memory-list context explains only a small fraction of variance in false alarmability but not hittability. We also show that, while interitem similarity explains a small percentage of variance in their forced-choice discriminability, ignoring their differential memorability properties as targets and foils fails to predict the asymmetries. Our results highlight the need to integrate item-level memorability into existing recognition-memory theories. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15698,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-28","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/xge0002003","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

According to current recognition-memory theories, a major source of confusion when people judge which stimuli they remember is the contextual similarity of those stimuli to those from the studied list. However, these theories overlook the potential for confusions to arise from item-specific memorability properties not explained by list properties-namely, the likelihood that a stimulus will be correctly recognized if studied ("hittability") or falsely recognized if not ("false alarmability")-independent of contextual similarity. Here, we introduce a memorability continuum model based on signal detection theory. The model predicts that differences in the individual "hittability" and "false alarmability" of arbitrary Items A and B grounded in their representational locations on an internal familiarity axis can often lead to asymmetric recognition performance in a forced-choice task such that recognition of Target A over Foil B is more accurate than recognition of Target B over Foil A. In a forced-choice experiment testing memory for real-world object images, the model successfully predicted specific item pair asymmetries. Using deep convolutional neural networks validated on human similarity judgments, we showed that memory-list context explains only a small fraction of variance in false alarmability but not hittability. We also show that, while interitem similarity explains a small percentage of variance in their forced-choice discriminability, ignoring their differential memorability properties as targets and foils fails to predict the asymmetries. Our results highlight the need to integrate item-level memorability into existing recognition-memory theories. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

单个项目记忆预测的识别-记忆不对称。
根据目前的认知记忆理论,当人们判断他们记住的刺激时,一个主要的困惑来源是这些刺激与研究列表中的刺激的上下文相似性。然而,这些理论忽略了由列表属性无法解释的特定项目记忆属性引起的潜在混淆,即,如果研究刺激将被正确识别的可能性(“可击中性”)或如果不被错误识别的可能性(“假警报性”)-独立于上下文相似性。本文介绍了一种基于信号检测理论的记忆连续体模型。该模型预测,任意项目A和B的个体“可击中性”和“假警报性”的差异,基于它们在内部熟悉轴上的代表性位置,通常会导致在强制选择任务中的不对称识别表现,例如,对目标A的识别比对目标B的识别比对目标B的识别更准确。该模型成功地预测了特定项目对的不对称性。使用经过人类相似性判断验证的深度卷积神经网络,我们发现记忆列表上下文只能解释假警报性的一小部分差异,而不能解释可击中性。我们还表明,虽然项目间相似性解释了他们的强制选择可辨性的一小部分差异,但忽略他们作为目标和挫败物的不同记忆特性无法预测不对称性。我们的研究结果强调了将项目级记忆性整合到现有的识别记忆理论中的必要性。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2026 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书