Loading…

Feedback, Confidence, and False Recall in the DRMRS Procedure

In the Deese-Roediger-McDermott-Read-Solso (DRMRS) procedure, participants recall word lists constructed around central concepts that are not on the lists. Seventy participants were given experimentally manipulated feedback (positive, negative or none) about their performance after three lists (Bloc...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.) N.J.), 2015-06, Vol.34 (2), p.248-267
Main Authors: Pirmoradi, Mona, McKelvie, Stuart
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c590t-7622b416314b7938aa23d97edabae1749067695f0419bfd738bd60e785e936ed3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c590t-7622b416314b7938aa23d97edabae1749067695f0419bfd738bd60e785e936ed3
container_end_page 267
container_issue 2
container_start_page 248
container_title Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.)
container_volume 34
creator Pirmoradi, Mona
McKelvie, Stuart
description In the Deese-Roediger-McDermott-Read-Solso (DRMRS) procedure, participants recall word lists constructed around central concepts that are not on the lists. Seventy participants were given experimentally manipulated feedback (positive, negative or none) about their performance after three lists (Block 1), and were then tested on six lists (Blocks 2 and 3). Feedback had an effect on general confidence and on confidence associated with recall for each list, but not on confidence associated with the recall of individual words. However, feedback did not affect memory performance on Blocks 2 and 3, particularly false recall. In addition, higher natural confidence in Block 1 was not associated with subsequent memory performance, particularly false recall. These results cast doubt on the suggestion that false recall can be affected by feedback, and are consistent with reports of a weak relationship or no relationship between confidence and memory performance.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s12144-014-9255-0
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1685140898</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A423533540</galeid><sourcerecordid>A423533540</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c590t-7622b416314b7938aa23d97edabae1749067695f0419bfd738bd60e785e936ed3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqN0l1r2zAUBmAzWujnD-idYVAYVJ2OJVvWxS66bOkKHStpey1k6Thx60itZMP276eQQhtIofhCRjyvvniz7AToOVAqvkYogHNCgRNZlCWhn7J9kKwiXDC2k_4prwgwoHvZQYwPlIKopNzPvk0RbaPN41k-8a7tLDqDZ7l2Np_qPmI-Q6P7Pu9cPiww_zH7PbvNb4I3aMeAR9luu1LHL-Nhdj_9eTf5Ra7_XF5NLq6JKSUdiKiKouFQMeCNkKzWumBWCrS60QiCS1ql05Qt5SCb1gpWN7aiKOoS0xXQssPs83rdp-CfR4yDevBjcGlLBVVdAqe1rF_VXPeoOtf6IWiz7KJRF7xgJWMlp0mRLWqODoPuvcO2S9Mb_nyLT5_FZWe2Br5sBJIZ8O8w12OM6up29nH7_XLTnr6xC9T9sIi-H4fOu7gJYQ1N8DEGbNVT6JY6_FNA1aotat0WldqiVm1Rq0yxzsRk3RzDmxd-N_Qfodq5dw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1685140898</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Feedback, Confidence, and False Recall in the DRMRS Procedure</title><source>Springer Nature</source><creator>Pirmoradi, Mona ; McKelvie, Stuart</creator><creatorcontrib>Pirmoradi, Mona ; McKelvie, Stuart</creatorcontrib><description>In the Deese-Roediger-McDermott-Read-Solso (DRMRS) procedure, participants recall word lists constructed around central concepts that are not on the lists. Seventy participants were given experimentally manipulated feedback (positive, negative or none) about their performance after three lists (Block 1), and were then tested on six lists (Blocks 2 and 3). Feedback had an effect on general confidence and on confidence associated with recall for each list, but not on confidence associated with the recall of individual words. However, feedback did not affect memory performance on Blocks 2 and 3, particularly false recall. In addition, higher natural confidence in Block 1 was not associated with subsequent memory performance, particularly false recall. These results cast doubt on the suggestion that false recall can be affected by feedback, and are consistent with reports of a weak relationship or no relationship between confidence and memory performance.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1046-1310</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1936-4733</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s12144-014-9255-0</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Behavioral Science and Psychology ; Feedback ; Feedback (Communication) ; Psychology ; Recall (Memory) ; Sex crimes ; Sexual abuse ; Social Sciences</subject><ispartof>Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.), 2015-06, Vol.34 (2), p.248-267</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2015 Springer</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c590t-7622b416314b7938aa23d97edabae1749067695f0419bfd738bd60e785e936ed3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c590t-7622b416314b7938aa23d97edabae1749067695f0419bfd738bd60e785e936ed3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pirmoradi, Mona</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McKelvie, Stuart</creatorcontrib><title>Feedback, Confidence, and False Recall in the DRMRS Procedure</title><title>Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.)</title><addtitle>Curr Psychol</addtitle><description>In the Deese-Roediger-McDermott-Read-Solso (DRMRS) procedure, participants recall word lists constructed around central concepts that are not on the lists. Seventy participants were given experimentally manipulated feedback (positive, negative or none) about their performance after three lists (Block 1), and were then tested on six lists (Blocks 2 and 3). Feedback had an effect on general confidence and on confidence associated with recall for each list, but not on confidence associated with the recall of individual words. However, feedback did not affect memory performance on Blocks 2 and 3, particularly false recall. In addition, higher natural confidence in Block 1 was not associated with subsequent memory performance, particularly false recall. These results cast doubt on the suggestion that false recall can be affected by feedback, and are consistent with reports of a weak relationship or no relationship between confidence and memory performance.</description><subject>Behavioral Science and Psychology</subject><subject>Feedback</subject><subject>Feedback (Communication)</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Recall (Memory)</subject><subject>Sex crimes</subject><subject>Sexual abuse</subject><subject>Social Sciences</subject><issn>1046-1310</issn><issn>1936-4733</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqN0l1r2zAUBmAzWujnD-idYVAYVJ2OJVvWxS66bOkKHStpey1k6Thx60itZMP276eQQhtIofhCRjyvvniz7AToOVAqvkYogHNCgRNZlCWhn7J9kKwiXDC2k_4prwgwoHvZQYwPlIKopNzPvk0RbaPN41k-8a7tLDqDZ7l2Np_qPmI-Q6P7Pu9cPiww_zH7PbvNb4I3aMeAR9luu1LHL-Nhdj_9eTf5Ra7_XF5NLq6JKSUdiKiKouFQMeCNkKzWumBWCrS60QiCS1ql05Qt5SCb1gpWN7aiKOoS0xXQssPs83rdp-CfR4yDevBjcGlLBVVdAqe1rF_VXPeoOtf6IWiz7KJRF7xgJWMlp0mRLWqODoPuvcO2S9Mb_nyLT5_FZWe2Br5sBJIZ8O8w12OM6up29nH7_XLTnr6xC9T9sIi-H4fOu7gJYQ1N8DEGbNVT6JY6_FNA1aotat0WldqiVm1Rq0yxzsRk3RzDmxd-N_Qfodq5dw</recordid><startdate>20150601</startdate><enddate>20150601</enddate><creator>Pirmoradi, Mona</creator><creator>McKelvie, Stuart</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IBG</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150601</creationdate><title>Feedback, Confidence, and False Recall in the DRMRS Procedure</title><author>Pirmoradi, Mona ; McKelvie, Stuart</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c590t-7622b416314b7938aa23d97edabae1749067695f0419bfd738bd60e785e936ed3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Behavioral Science and Psychology</topic><topic>Feedback</topic><topic>Feedback (Communication)</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Recall (Memory)</topic><topic>Sex crimes</topic><topic>Sexual abuse</topic><topic>Social Sciences</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pirmoradi, Mona</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McKelvie, Stuart</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale in Context : Biography</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pirmoradi, Mona</au><au>McKelvie, Stuart</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Feedback, Confidence, and False Recall in the DRMRS Procedure</atitle><jtitle>Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.)</jtitle><stitle>Curr Psychol</stitle><date>2015-06-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>34</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>248</spage><epage>267</epage><pages>248-267</pages><issn>1046-1310</issn><eissn>1936-4733</eissn><abstract>In the Deese-Roediger-McDermott-Read-Solso (DRMRS) procedure, participants recall word lists constructed around central concepts that are not on the lists. Seventy participants were given experimentally manipulated feedback (positive, negative or none) about their performance after three lists (Block 1), and were then tested on six lists (Blocks 2 and 3). Feedback had an effect on general confidence and on confidence associated with recall for each list, but not on confidence associated with the recall of individual words. However, feedback did not affect memory performance on Blocks 2 and 3, particularly false recall. In addition, higher natural confidence in Block 1 was not associated with subsequent memory performance, particularly false recall. These results cast doubt on the suggestion that false recall can be affected by feedback, and are consistent with reports of a weak relationship or no relationship between confidence and memory performance.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><doi>10.1007/s12144-014-9255-0</doi><tpages>20</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1046-1310
ispartof Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.), 2015-06, Vol.34 (2), p.248-267
issn 1046-1310
1936-4733
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_1685140898
source Springer Nature
subjects Behavioral Science and Psychology
Feedback
Feedback (Communication)
Psychology
Recall (Memory)
Sex crimes
Sexual abuse
Social Sciences
title Feedback, Confidence, and False Recall in the DRMRS Procedure
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-06T17%3A46%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Feedback,%20Confidence,%20and%20False%20Recall%20in%20the%20DRMRS%20Procedure&rft.jtitle=Current%20psychology%20(New%20Brunswick,%20N.J.)&rft.au=Pirmoradi,%20Mona&rft.date=2015-06-01&rft.volume=34&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=248&rft.epage=267&rft.pages=248-267&rft.issn=1046-1310&rft.eissn=1936-4733&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s12144-014-9255-0&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA423533540%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c590t-7622b416314b7938aa23d97edabae1749067695f0419bfd738bd60e785e936ed3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1685140898&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A423533540&rfr_iscdi=true