Separating sensitivity from response bias: Implications of comparisons of yes-no and forced-choice tests for models and measures of recognition memory

  • Neal E.A. Kroll
  • , Andrew P. Yonelinas
  • , Ian G. Dobbins
  • , Christina M. Frederick

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

59 Scopus citations

Abstract

A fundamental challenge to psychological research is the measurement of cognitive processes uncontaminated by response strategies resulting from different testing procedures. Test-free estimates of ability are vital when comparing the performance of different groups or different conditions. The current study applied several sets of measurement models to both forced-choice and yes-no recognition memory tests and concluded that the traditional signal-detection model resulted in distorted estimates of accuracy. Two-factor models were necessary to separate memory sensitivity from response bias. These models indicated that (a) memory accuracy did not differ across the tests and (b) the tests relied on the same underlying memory processes. The results illustrate the pitfalls of using a single-component model to measure accuracy in tasks that reflect 2 or more underlying processes.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)241-254
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of Experimental Psychology: General
Volume131
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2002

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Separating sensitivity from response bias: Implications of comparisons of yes-no and forced-choice tests for models and measures of recognition memory'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this