主旨和联想如何影响错误记忆:错误认知和主旨评定标准。

IF 4.6 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Minyu Chang, C J Brainerd, Daniel M Bialer, Xinya Liu
{"title":"主旨和联想如何影响错误记忆:错误认知和主旨评定标准。","authors":"Minyu Chang, C J Brainerd, Daniel M Bialer, Xinya Liu","doi":"10.3758/s13428-025-02681-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Deese/Roediger/McDermott (DRM) illusion is one of the most widely used methods for studying false memory. Early studies provided normed false recall and false recognition data for DRM lists, where recognition is preceded by prior recall tests, and reported regression analyses that revealed backward associative strength (BAS) as one of the strongest predictors of false memory. As an extension of that line of research, we collected new recognition norms that are not confounded by prior recall tests and included gist strength (GS) as a theory-driven predictor of false memory. In Study 1, we normed true and false recognition for 55 DRM lists without prior recall tests, and in Study 2, we normed these lists for their perceived levels of gist strength. In Study 3, we fit a series of multiple linear regression models to the recognition data from Study 1 as well as recall and recognition data from prior false memory norms to disentangle the effects of BAS and GS on false recognition (with and without prior recall) and immediate false recall. Our results revealed that levels of true recognition and the recall-recognition correlation were inflated by prior recall tests. More importantly, GS was the strongest predictor of false recognition, whereas BAS was the strongest predictor of immediate false recall. A GS × BAS interaction was consistently observed for false recall and false recognition, in which the effects of BAS declined as GS increased. This suggests that the two variables compete with each other rather than reinforce each other's effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":8717,"journal":{"name":"Behavior Research Methods","volume":"57 6","pages":"159"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12041068/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How gist and association affect false memory: False recognition and gist rating norms.\",\"authors\":\"Minyu Chang, C J Brainerd, Daniel M Bialer, Xinya Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.3758/s13428-025-02681-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The Deese/Roediger/McDermott (DRM) illusion is one of the most widely used methods for studying false memory. Early studies provided normed false recall and false recognition data for DRM lists, where recognition is preceded by prior recall tests, and reported regression analyses that revealed backward associative strength (BAS) as one of the strongest predictors of false memory. As an extension of that line of research, we collected new recognition norms that are not confounded by prior recall tests and included gist strength (GS) as a theory-driven predictor of false memory. In Study 1, we normed true and false recognition for 55 DRM lists without prior recall tests, and in Study 2, we normed these lists for their perceived levels of gist strength. In Study 3, we fit a series of multiple linear regression models to the recognition data from Study 1 as well as recall and recognition data from prior false memory norms to disentangle the effects of BAS and GS on false recognition (with and without prior recall) and immediate false recall. Our results revealed that levels of true recognition and the recall-recognition correlation were inflated by prior recall tests. More importantly, GS was the strongest predictor of false recognition, whereas BAS was the strongest predictor of immediate false recall. A GS × BAS interaction was consistently observed for false recall and false recognition, in which the effects of BAS declined as GS increased. This suggests that the two variables compete with each other rather than reinforce each other's effects.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8717,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Behavior Research Methods\",\"volume\":\"57 6\",\"pages\":\"159\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12041068/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Behavior Research Methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-025-02681-8\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavior Research Methods","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-025-02681-8","RegionNum":2,"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

摘要

迪斯/罗迪格/麦克德莫特错觉(DRM)是研究错误记忆最广泛使用的方法之一。早期的研究为DRM列表提供了规范的错误回忆和错误识别数据,其中识别之前进行了先前回忆测试,并报告了回归分析,揭示了向后联想强度(BAS)是错误记忆的最强预测因子之一。作为该研究的延伸,我们收集了新的识别规范,这些规范不会被先前的回忆测试混淆,并将主旨强度(GS)作为理论驱动的错误记忆预测因子。在研究1中,我们规范了55个没有事先回忆测试的DRM列表的真假识别,在研究2中,我们规范了这些列表的要点强度感知水平。在研究3中,我们对研究1的识别数据以及先前错误记忆规范的回忆和识别数据拟合了一系列多元线性回归模型,以揭示BAS和GS对错误识别(有和没有先前回忆)和即时错误回忆的影响。我们的研究结果表明,真实识别水平和回忆-识别相关性被先前的回忆测试夸大了。更重要的是,GS是错误识别的最强预测因子,而BAS是即时错误回忆的最强预测因子。在错误回忆和错误识别中,GS与BAS的交互作用一致,其中BAS的作用随着GS的增加而减弱。这表明,这两个变量是相互竞争的,而不是相互加强的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How gist and association affect false memory: False recognition and gist rating norms.

The Deese/Roediger/McDermott (DRM) illusion is one of the most widely used methods for studying false memory. Early studies provided normed false recall and false recognition data for DRM lists, where recognition is preceded by prior recall tests, and reported regression analyses that revealed backward associative strength (BAS) as one of the strongest predictors of false memory. As an extension of that line of research, we collected new recognition norms that are not confounded by prior recall tests and included gist strength (GS) as a theory-driven predictor of false memory. In Study 1, we normed true and false recognition for 55 DRM lists without prior recall tests, and in Study 2, we normed these lists for their perceived levels of gist strength. In Study 3, we fit a series of multiple linear regression models to the recognition data from Study 1 as well as recall and recognition data from prior false memory norms to disentangle the effects of BAS and GS on false recognition (with and without prior recall) and immediate false recall. Our results revealed that levels of true recognition and the recall-recognition correlation were inflated by prior recall tests. More importantly, GS was the strongest predictor of false recognition, whereas BAS was the strongest predictor of immediate false recall. A GS × BAS interaction was consistently observed for false recall and false recognition, in which the effects of BAS declined as GS increased. This suggests that the two variables compete with each other rather than reinforce each other's effects.

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
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
9.30%
发文量
266
期刊介绍: Behavior Research Methods publishes articles concerned with the methods, techniques, and instrumentation of research in experimental psychology. The journal focuses particularly on the use of computer technology in psychological research. An annual special issue is devoted to this field.
×
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