Diffusion model drift rates can be influenced by decision processes: An analysis of the strength-based mirror effect

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 38, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 1137-1151

  Starns, Jeffrey J ^a   Ratcliff, Roger ^b   White, Corey N ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

^b OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

Differentiation; Diffusion model; Drift criterion; Recognition memory; Strength based mirror effect

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; LINGUISTICS; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TEST; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RECOGNITION; STUDENT; UNIVERSITY;

BAYES THEOREM; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); STUDENTS; UNIVERSITIES; VOCABULARY;

EID: 84872682790     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0028151     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Brown, J., Lewis, V. J., & Monk, A. F. (1977). Memorability, word frequency and negative recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 29, 461-473. doi:10.1080/14640747708400622
2. Criss, A. H. (2006). The consequences of differentiation in episodic memory: Similarity and the strength based mirror effect. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 461-478. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2006.08.003
3. Criss, A. H. (2009). The distribution of subjective memory strength: List strength and response bias. Cognitive Psychology, 59, 297-319. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2009.07.003
4. Criss, A. H. (2010). Differentiation and response bias in episodic memory: Evidence from reaction time distributions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 484-499. doi: 10.1037/a0018435
5. Criss, A. H., Malmberg, K. J., & Shiffrin, R. M. (2011). Output interference in recognition memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 64, 316-326. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2011.02.003
6. Dennis, S., & Humphreys, M. S. (2001). A context noise model of episodic word recognition. Psychological Review, 108, 452-478. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.108.2.452
7. Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. (1985). The bootstrap method for assessing statistical accuracy. Behaviormetrika, 12, 1-35. doi:10.2333/bhmk.12.17_1
8. Glanzer, M., & Adams, J. K. (1985). The mirror effect in recognition memory. Memory & Cognition, 13, 8-20. doi:10.3758/BF03198438
9. Glanzer, M., Hilford, A., & Maloney, L. T. (2009). Likelihood ratio decisions in memory: Three implied regularities. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 431-455. doi:10.3758/PBR.16.3.431
10. Hirshman, E. (1995). Decision processes in recognition memory: Criterion shifts and the list-strength paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 302-313. doi:10.1037/02787393.21.2.302
11. Jeffreys, H. (1961). Theory of probability (3rd ed.). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
12. Kuçera, H., & Francis, W. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
13. Malmberg, K. J. (2008). Recognition memory: A review of the critical findings and an integrated theory for relating them. Cognitive Psychology, 57, 335-384. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2008.02.004
14. Marsh, R. L., Meeks, J. T., Cook, G. I., Clark-Foos, A., Hicks, J. L., & Brewer, G. A. (2009). Retrieval constraints on the front end create differences in recollection on a subsequent test. Journal of Memory and Language, 61, 470-479. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2009.06.005
15. McCabe, D. P., & Balota, D. A. (2007). Context effects on remembering and knowing: The expectancy heuristic. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 536-549. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.33.3.536
16. McClelland, J. L., & Chappell, M. (1998). Familiarity breeds differentiation: A subjective-likelihood approach to the effects of experience in recognition memory. Psychological Review, 105, 724-760. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.105.4.734-760
17. McNicol, D. (1972). A primer of signal detection theory. Sydney, Australia: Australasian Publishing Company.
18. Nelder, J. A., & Mead, R. (1965). A SIMPLEX method for function minimization. Computer Journal, 7, 308-313.
19. Nosofsky, R. M., & Stanton, R. D. (2006). Speeded old-new recognition of multidimensional perceptual stimuli: Modeling performance at the individual-participant and individual-item levels. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 314-334. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.32.2.314
20. Ratcliff, R. (1978). A theory of memory retrieval. Psychological Review, 85, 59-108. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.85.2.59
21. Ratcliff, R. (1985). Theoretical interpretations of the speed and accuracy of positive and negative responses. Psychological Review, 92, 212-225. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.92.2.212
22. Ratcliff, R. (2001). Diffusion and random walk processes. International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (Vol. 6, pp. 36683673). Oxford, England: Elsevier.
23. Ratcliff, R., Clark, S. E., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1990). List-strength effect: I. Data and discussion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 163-178. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.16.2.163
24. Ratcliff, R., & McKoon, G. (2008). The diffusion decision model: Theory and data for two-choice decision tasks. Neural Computation, 20, 873922. doi:10.1162/neco.2008.12-06-420
25. Ratcliff, R., & Smith, P. L. (2004). A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time. Psychological Review, 111, 333367. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.111.2.333
26. Ratcliff, R., Van Zandt, T., & McKoon, G. (1999). Connectionist and diffusion models of reaction time. Psychological Review, 106, 261-300. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.106.2.261
27. Rouder, J. N., Speckman, P. L., Sun, D., Morey, R. D., & Iverson, G. (2009). Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 225-237. doi:10.3758/PBR.16.2.225
28. Shiffrin, R. M., Ratcliff, R., & Clark, S. E. (1990). List-strength effect: II. Theoretical mechanisms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 179-195. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.16.2.179
29. Shiffrin, R. M., & Steyvers, M. (1997). A model for recognition memory: REM-retrieving effectively from memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 145-166. doi:10.3758/BF03209391
30. Singer, M. (2009). Strength-based criterion shifts in recognition memory. Memory & Cognition, 37, 976-984. doi:10.3758/MC.37.7.976
31. Singer, M., & Wixted, J. T. (2006). Effect of delay on recognition decisions: Evidence for a criterion shift. Memory & Cognition, 34, 125-137. doi:10.3758/BF03193392
32. Starns, J. J., & Hicks, J. L. (2011, November). Strength-based criterion shifts within a single test: How flexible are they? Paper presented at the 52nd Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Seattle, WA.
33. Starns, J. J., Hicks, J. L., & Marsh, R. L. (2006). Repetition effects in associative false recognition: Theme-based criterion shifts are the exception, not the rule. Memory, 14, 742-761.
34. Starns, J. J., White, C. N., & Ratcliff, R. (2010). A direct test of the differentiation mechanism: REM, BCDMEM, and the strength-based mirror effect in recognition memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 63, 18-34. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2010.03.004
35. Stretch, V., & Wixted, J. T. (1998). On the difference between strengthbased and frequency-based mirror effects in recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 1379-1396. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.24.6.1379
36. Turner, B. M., Van Zandt, T., & Brown, S. (2011). A dynamic stimulusdriven model of signal detection. Psychological Review, 118, 583-613. doi:10.1037/a0025191
37. Verde, M. F., & Rotello, C. M. (2007). Memory strength and the decision process in recognition memory. Memory & Cognition, 35, 254-262. doi:10.3758/BF03193446
38. Wagenmakers, E.-J., Ratcliff, R., Gomez, P., & McKoon, G. (2008). A diffusion model account of criterion shifts in the lexical decision task. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 140-159. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.04.006