Remember/know judgments probe degrees of recollection

Remembering and knowing are states of awareness that accompany the retrieval of facts, faces, and experiences from our past. Although originally intended to separate episodic from semantic memory, the dominant view today is that recollection-based decisions underlie remember responses, whereas familiarity-based decisions underlie know responses. Many functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies as well as lesion studies have relied on the remember/know procedure to identify the neural correlates of recollection and familiarity. An implicit assumption of this approach is that know responses, which are thought to tap familiarity-based decisions, are devoid of recollection. We investigated this issue by using a source memory procedure and found that the accuracy of source recollection was significantly above chance for studied words that were declared to be old and known. Critically, this held true even when the source decision was made before the old/new decision (i.e., even after successful recollection had just occurred). Our results show that although recollection and familiarity may be different processes, the remember/know paradigm does not probe them directly. As such, dissociations involving remember/know judgments in fMRI studies and in studies involving amnesic patients should not be construed as dissociations between recollection and familiarity.

Moving beyond pure signal-detection models: Comment on Wixted (2007)

The dual-process signal-detection (DPSD) model assumes that recognition memory is based on recollection of qualitative information or on a signal-detection-based familiarity process. The model has proven useful for understanding results from a wide range of memory research, including behavioral, neuropsychological, electrophysiological, and neuroimaging studies. However, a number of concerns have been raised about the model over the years, and it has been suggested that an unequal-variance signal-detection (UVSD) model that incorporates separate recollection and familiarity processes (J. T. Wixted, 2007) may provide an equally good, or even better, account of the data. In this article, the authors show that the results of studies that differentiate these models support the predictions of the DPSD model and indicate that recognition does not reflect the summing of 2 signal-detection processes, as the new UVSD model assumes. In addition, the assumptions of the DPSD model are clarified in order to address some of the common misconceptions about the model. Although important challenges remain, hybrid models such as this provide a more useful framework within which to understand human memory than do pure signal-detection models.

Sum-Difference Theory of Remembering and Knowing: A Two-Dimensional Signal-Detection Model

In the remember-know paradigm for studying recognition memory, participants distinguish items whose presentations are episodically remembered from those that are merely familiar. A one-dimensional model postulates that remember responses are just high-confidence old judgments, but a meta-analysis of 373 experiments shows that the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves predicted by this model have the wrong slope. According to the new sum-difference Theory of remembering and knowing (STREAK), old items differ from new ones in both global and specific memory strength: The old-new judgment is based on a weighted sum of these dimensions, and the remember- know judgment is based on a weighted difference. STREAK accounts for the form of several novel kinds of ROC curves and for existing remember-know and item-recognition data.