Abstract
Both the recognition-without-identification (RWI) and feeling-of-knowing (FOK) paradigms attempt to tap participants' sense about a target that is inaccessible. In the case of RWI, participants judge the likelihood that the inaccessible target was studied. In the case of FOKs, participants judge the likelihood that the inaccessible target will be recognized at a later point in time. The present study compared the two using a hybrid paradigm. The patterns of responding differed depending on whether the judgment was of the RWI type or the FOK type. For the former, ratings were significantly higher for studied than for unstudied inaccessible targets (the typical RWI effect). For the latter, ratings were significantly lower for studied than for unstudied inaccessible targets (a reversal of the usual RWI effect). Similarity of the targets and distractors diminished the usual RWI effect, but not its reversal in the FOK situation, suggesting that the bases of the two effects differ. A potential explanation is that when participants judge whether an inaccessible target was presented earlier, they are oriented toward relying on cue familiarity, which should be greater for cues of studied targets, whereas when they judge whether they will recognize an inaccessible target later on, they are oriented toward relying on the accessibility of information, which is greater in the unstudied condition, due to the lack of priming of the targets.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1178-1188 |
| Number of pages | 11 |
| Journal | Memory and Cognition |
| Volume | 40 |
| Issue number | 8 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Nov 1 2012 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Feeling of knowing
- Metamemory
- Recognition without identification
- Retrieval failure
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
- Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
- Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
Cite this
Judgments for inaccessible targets : Comparing recognition without identification and the feeling of knowing. / Nomi, Jason; Cleary, Anne M.
In: Memory and Cognition, Vol. 40, No. 8, 01.11.2012, p. 1178-1188.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Judgments for inaccessible targets
T2 - Comparing recognition without identification and the feeling of knowing
AU - Nomi, Jason
AU - Cleary, Anne M.
PY - 2012/11/1
Y1 - 2012/11/1
N2 - Both the recognition-without-identification (RWI) and feeling-of-knowing (FOK) paradigms attempt to tap participants' sense about a target that is inaccessible. In the case of RWI, participants judge the likelihood that the inaccessible target was studied. In the case of FOKs, participants judge the likelihood that the inaccessible target will be recognized at a later point in time. The present study compared the two using a hybrid paradigm. The patterns of responding differed depending on whether the judgment was of the RWI type or the FOK type. For the former, ratings were significantly higher for studied than for unstudied inaccessible targets (the typical RWI effect). For the latter, ratings were significantly lower for studied than for unstudied inaccessible targets (a reversal of the usual RWI effect). Similarity of the targets and distractors diminished the usual RWI effect, but not its reversal in the FOK situation, suggesting that the bases of the two effects differ. A potential explanation is that when participants judge whether an inaccessible target was presented earlier, they are oriented toward relying on cue familiarity, which should be greater for cues of studied targets, whereas when they judge whether they will recognize an inaccessible target later on, they are oriented toward relying on the accessibility of information, which is greater in the unstudied condition, due to the lack of priming of the targets.
AB - Both the recognition-without-identification (RWI) and feeling-of-knowing (FOK) paradigms attempt to tap participants' sense about a target that is inaccessible. In the case of RWI, participants judge the likelihood that the inaccessible target was studied. In the case of FOKs, participants judge the likelihood that the inaccessible target will be recognized at a later point in time. The present study compared the two using a hybrid paradigm. The patterns of responding differed depending on whether the judgment was of the RWI type or the FOK type. For the former, ratings were significantly higher for studied than for unstudied inaccessible targets (the typical RWI effect). For the latter, ratings were significantly lower for studied than for unstudied inaccessible targets (a reversal of the usual RWI effect). Similarity of the targets and distractors diminished the usual RWI effect, but not its reversal in the FOK situation, suggesting that the bases of the two effects differ. A potential explanation is that when participants judge whether an inaccessible target was presented earlier, they are oriented toward relying on cue familiarity, which should be greater for cues of studied targets, whereas when they judge whether they will recognize an inaccessible target later on, they are oriented toward relying on the accessibility of information, which is greater in the unstudied condition, due to the lack of priming of the targets.
KW - Feeling of knowing
KW - Metamemory
KW - Recognition without identification
KW - Retrieval failure
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84870543226&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84870543226&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3758/s13421-012-0222-4
DO - 10.3758/s13421-012-0222-4
M3 - Article
C2 - 22700340
AN - SCOPUS:84870543226
VL - 40
SP - 1178
EP - 1188
JO - Memory and Cognition
JF - Memory and Cognition
SN - 0090-502X
IS - 8
ER -