Search

This article addresses the issue of whether the remember-know (RK) task is best explained by a single-process or a dual-process model. All single-process models propose that remember and know responses reflect different levels of a single strength-of-evidence dimension. Thus, across conditions in which response criteria are held constant, these models predict that the RK task is unidimensional. Many dual-process models propose that remember and know responses reflect two qualitatively distinct processes underlying recognition memory, often characterized as recollection and familiarity. These models predict that the RK task is bidimensional. Using data from 37 studies, the author conducted a state-trace analysis to determine the dimensionality of the RK task. In those studies, non-memory-related differences between conditions were eliminated via decision criteria constrained to be constant across all levels of the independent variables. The results reveal little or no evidence of bidimensionality and lend additional support to the unequal-variance signal detection model. Other arguments supporting a bidimensional interpretation are examined, and the author concludes there is insufficient evidence for the RK task to be used to identify qualitatively different memory components. (Contains 11 figures and 16 footnotes.)

This article critically examines the view that the signal detection theory (SDT) interpretation of the remember-know (RK) paradigm has been ruled out by the evidence. The author evaluates 5 empirical arguments against a database of 72 studies reporting RK data under 400 different conditions. These arguments concern (a) the functional independence of remember and know rates, (b) the invariance of estimates of sensitivity, (c) the relationship between remember rates and overall hit and false alarm rates, (d) the relationship between RK responses and confidence judgments, and (e) dissociations between remember and overall hit rates. Each of these arguments is shown to be flawed, and despite being open to refutation, the SDT interpretation is consistent with existing data from both the RK and remember-know-guess paradigms and offers a basis for further theoretical development.

Describing the activities of the mind as interactions of different processing systems depends on the observation of functional dissociations between information processing tasks. Limitations of single and double dissociations are outlined, and a technique--reversed association--is suggested as a basis for inferring functionally independent processes underlying performance. (SLD)