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...
Saved in:
Published in: | Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.) N.J.), 2015-06, Vol.34 (2), p.248-267 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
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 |