Older Adults' Use of Metacognitive Knowledge in Source Monitoring: Spared Monitoring but Impaired Control

Psychology and Aging

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 143-149

  Kuhlmann, Beatrice G ^a   Touron, Dayna R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT GREENSBORO   (United States)

Author keywords

Cognitive aging; Metacognition; Multinomial modeling; Source monitoring

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AGING; ARTICLE; COGNITION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EPISODIC MEMORY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MONITORING; RECALL; WORD RECOGNITION;

ADOLESCENT; AGED; AGING; COGNITION; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MEMORY; MENTAL RECALL; MIDDLE AGED; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79953153019     PISSN: 08827974     EISSN: 19391498     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0021055     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Batchelder W.H., Riefer D.M. Multinomial processing models of source monitoring. Psychological Review 1990, 97:548-564. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.97.4.548.
2. Batchelder W.H., Riefer D.M. Theoretical and empirical review of multinomial process tree modeling. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1999, 6:57-86.
3. Bayen U.J., Murnane K., Erdfelder E. Source discrimination, item detection, and multinomial models of source monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1996, 22:197-215. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.22.1.197.
4. Bayen U.J., Nakamura G.V., Dupuis S.E., Yang C.-L. The use of schematic knowledge about sources in source monitoring. Memory & Cognition 2000, 28:480-500.
5. Cook G.I., Marsh R.L., Hicks J.L. Source memory in the absence of successful cued recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2006, 32:828-835. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.32.4.828.
6. Dodson C.S., Holland P.W., Shimamura A.P. On the recollection of specific- and partial-source information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1998, 24:1121-1136. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.24.5.1121.
7. Dunlosky J., Connor L.T. Age differences in the allocation of study time account for age differences in memory performances. Memory & Cognition 1997, 25:691-700.
8. Gallo D.A., Bell D.M., Beier J.S., Schacter D.L. Two types of recollection-based monitoring in younger and older adults: Recall-to-reject and the distinctiveness heuristic. Memory 2006, 14:730-741. doi: 10.1080/09658210600648506.
9. Gallo D.A., Cotel S.C., Moore C.D., Schacter D.L. Aging can spare recollection-based retrieval monitoring: The importance of event distinctiveness. Psychology and Aging 2007, 22:209-213. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.22.1.209.
10. Hertzog C., Hultsch D.F. Metacognition in adulthood and old age. The handbook of aging and cognition 2000, 417-466. Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers, Mahwah, NJ. 2nd ed. F.I.M. Craik, T.A. Salthouse (Eds.).
11. Hines J.C., Touron D.R., Hertzog C. Metacognitive influences on study time allocation in an associative recognition task: An analysis of adult age differences. Psychology and Aging 2009, 24:462-475. doi: 10.1037/a0014417.
12. Hu X., Batchelder W.H. The statistical analysis of general processing tree models with the EM algorithm. Psychometrika 1994, 59:21-47. doi: 10.1007/BF02294263.
13. Johnson M.K., Hashtroudi S., Lindsay D.S. Source monitoring. Psychological Bulletin 1993, 114:3-28. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.114.1.3.
14. Kelley C.M., Sahakyan L. Memory, monitoring, and control in the attainment of memory accuracy. Journal of Memory and Language 2003, 48:704-721. doi: 10.1016/S0749-596X(02)00504-1.
15. Klauer K.C., Wegener I. Unraveling social categorization in the " Who said what?" paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1998, 75:1155-1178. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.75.5.1155.
16. MacLaverty S.N., Hertzog C. Do age-related differences in episodic feeling of knowing accuracy depend on the timing of the judgement?. Memory 2009, 17:860-873. doi: 10.1080/09658210903374537.
17. Mather M., Johnson M.K., De Leonardis D.M. Stereotype reliance in source monitoring: Age differences and neuropsychological test correlates. Cognitive Neuropsychology 1999, 16:437-458. doi: 10.1080/026432999380870.
18. Mayr U. Age differences in the selection of mental sets: The role of inhibition, stimulus ambiguity, and response-set overlap. Psychology and Aging 2001, 16:96-109. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.16.1.96.
19. Meiser T., Bröder A. Memory for multidimensional source information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 2002, 28:116-137. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.28.1.116.
20. Meiser T., Hewstone M. Cognitive processes in stereotype formation: The role of correct contingency learning for biased group judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2004, 87:599-614. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.87.5.599.
21. Meiser T., Sattler C., von Hecker U. Metacognitive inferences in source memory judgements: The role of perceived differences in item recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2007, 60:1015-1040. doi: 10.1080/17470210600875215.
22. Moshagen M. multiTree: A computer program for the analysis of multinomial processing tree models. Behavior Research Methods 2010, 42:42-54. doi: 10.3758/BRM.42.1.42.
23. Murnane K., Bayen U.J. An evaluation of empirical measures of source identification. Memory & Cognition 1996, 24:417-428.
24. Old S.R., Naveh-Benjamin M. Differential effects of age on item and associative measures of memory: A meta analysis. Psychology and Aging 2008, 23:104-118. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.23.1.104.
25. Riefer D.M., Hu X., Batchelder W.H. Response strategies in source monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 1994, 20:680-693. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.20.3.680.
26. Starns J.J., Hicks J.L. Context attributes in memory are bound to item information, but not to one another. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2008, 15:309-314. doi: 10.3758/PBR.15.2.309.
27. Starns J.J., Hicks J.L., Brown N.L., Martin B.A. Source memory for unrecognized items: Predictions from multivariate signal detection theory. Memory & Cognition 2008, 36:1-8. doi: 10.3758/MC.36.1.1.