What makes recognition without awareness appear to be elusive? Strategic factors that influence the accuracy of guesses.
Various factors could conceivably promote the accuracy of guesses during a recognition test. Two that we identified in previous studies are forced-choice testing format and high perceptual similarity between the repeat target and novel foil. In restricted circumstances, the relative perceptual fluency of the target can be compared with that of the foil and used as a reliable cue to guide accurate responses that occur without explicit retrieval--a phenomenon we referred to as "implicit recognition." In this issue, Jeneson and colleagues report a failure to replicate accurate guesses and also a tendency on the part of subjects to hazard guesses infrequently, even though testing circumstances were very similar to those that we used. To resolve this discrepancy, we developed a simple manipulation to encourage either guessing or confident responding. Encouraging guessing increased both the prevalence of guesses and the accuracy of guesses in a recognition test, relative to when confident responding was encouraged. When guessing was encouraged, guesses were highly accurate (as in our previous demonstrations of implicit recognition), whereas when confident responding was encouraged, guesses were at chance levels (as in Jeneson and colleagues' data). In light of a substantial literature showing high accuracy despite low confidence in certain circumstances, we infer that both the prevalence and accuracy of guessing can be influenced by whether subjects adopt guessing-friendly strategies. Our findings thus help to further characterize conditions likely to promote implicit recognition based on perceptual fluency.
Voss
Joel L
JL
Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois 61801, USA. joelvoss@illinois.edu
Paller
Ken A
KA
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D001288:Attention / Q000502:physiology; D001364:Awareness / Q000502:physiology*; D002755:Choice Behavior / Q000502:physiology; D003463:Cues; D004192:Discrimination, Psychological / Q000502:physiology*; D005071:Evoked Potentials / Q000502:physiology; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D009483:Neuropsychological Tests; D010153:Paired-Associate Learning / Q000502:physiology; D010775:Photic Stimulation / Q000379:methods; D021641:Recognition, Psychology / Q000502:physiology*; D013223:Statistics as Topic; D055815:Young Adult
Psychol Sci. 2009 Nov;20(11):1381-7
19818044
Behav Brain Funct. 2007 Aug 14;3:40
17697339
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2001 May;27(3):701-22
11394675
Neuropsychology. 1999 Apr;13(2):198-205
10353371
Learn Mem. 2010 Sep 01;17(9):454-9
20810620
Neuron. 2003 May 8;38(3):507-16
12741996
Neuropsychologia. 2006;44(5):834-9
16157355
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2005 Mar;5(1):14-20
15913004
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1998 Jan;24(1):27-47
9438952
Neuropsychology. 2008 Nov;22(6):710-7
18999344
Neuropsychologia. 2008 Nov;46(13):3021-9
18691605
Psychol Bull. 1957 Sep;54(5):383-405
13485266
J Neurosci. 2010 Jul 7;30(27):9181-8
20610752
Acta Psychol (Amst). 1998 Apr;98(2-3):141-65
9621828
Mem Cognit. 2001 Mar;29(2):234-46
11352206
Science. 2006 Feb 17;311(5763):1005-7
16484496
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1998 Sep;24(5):1306-15
9747533
Learn Mem. 2008 May 30;15(6):454-9
18519546
Psychon Bull Rev. 2009 Oct;16(5):824-31
19815784
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2001 Mar;1(1):3-9
12467099
Conscious Cogn. 2009 Mar;18(1):39-55
19010060
J Mem Lang. 2004 Feb;50(2):196-211
29129957
Nat Neurosci. 2009 Mar;12(3):349-55
19198606
Science. 1898 Aug 5;8(188):162-3
17829852
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2001 Sep;130(3):361-79
11561915