09:00 - 10:30
Parallel sessions 4
09:00 - 10:30
Room: HSZ - N5
Chair/s:
Désirée Schönung, Nikoletta Symeonidou
Source memory research aims at understanding how people remember the origin of information (e.g., Where did I read the latest news?). This double symposium brings together findings from both basic (Part 1) and more applied (Part 2) source memory research. The first session highlights new developments in modeling approaches as well as empirical work addressing fundamental determinants of source memory.
Beatrice G. Kuhlmann opens the session with “A Storage-Retrieval Extension of the Two-High-Threshold Multinomial Model of Source Monitoring.”, introducing an extended version of the often-used two-high-threshold multinomial model of source monitoring (2HTSM, Bayen et al., 1996). This extended version distinguishes between storage and retrieval components of source memory by incorporating two separate source-memory parameters.
Meike Kroneisen follows with “The Rare and the Common: Can Rarity Influence the Animacy Effect in Source Memory?”, investigating whether the animacy advantage in source memory depends on the relative frequency of animate and inanimate stimuli. Her talk provides insights into how base-rate expectations and attention shape encoding and retrieval.
In “Source Memory and Metamemory for Concrete and Abstract Words,” Désirée Schönung examines how people monitor their memory for different word types. The talk focuses on whether individuals distinguish between item and source memory in their metamemory judgments by recognizing that concreteness affects item but not source memory.
Further advancing model-related aspects, Hilal Tanyas presents in her talk “Modeling Latency Processes in Source Monitoring” a formal modeling approach that integrates response times to the 2HTSM. This allows estimating the relative speed of memory- and guessing-based processes.
Finally, Lena Nadarevic bridges to more applied questions of source memory in her talk “Source Effects in Memory for Truth and Falsity: A Comparison of Self-Generated Judgments and External Feedback”. Across two experiments, she investigates whether participants remember self-generated subjective truth judgments better than externally provided objective feedback, consistent with the generation effect.
Together, these talks illustrate the range of current approaches to studying source memory, advancing theoretical and methodological understanding of source memory processes. The first session concludes with a general discussion, leading over to Part II: Source Memory - Applied Research.
Submission 348
Source Memory and Metamemory for Concrete and Abstract Words
SymposiumTalk-03
Presented by: Désirée N. Schönung
Désirée N. SchönungGiulia AlbrechtBeatrice G. Kuhlmann
University of Mannheim, Germany
Previous research has demonstrated that concrete words are remembered better than abstract words and that participants can anticipate this advantage in their judgments of learning (JOLs). The present study examined whether individuals can distinguish item from source memory (e.g., memory for the speaker of a word) in their metacognitive monitoring by also providing judgments of source (JOSs) for abstract and concrete words. We hypothesized that word concreteness would not affect source memory. Consequently, given that participants can distinguish their predictions for item and source memory, we hypothesized they use this item cue less—or not at all—when making JOSs. A total of 106 university students participated in a laboratory experiment in which they studied concrete and abstract nouns presented by either a male or a female speaker. After each item–source pair, participants provided both a JOL and a JOS. As expected, participants predicted and exhibited higher item memory for concrete compared with abstract nouns. However, contrary to our hypothesis, source memory also benefited from word concreteness. Consistent with this finding, participants incorporated concreteness into their JOSs, though to a lesser extent than in their JOLs. These results suggest that the item-cue concreteness is differentially weighed when making JOLs versus JOSs in line with the idea of metacognitive distinction between these two memory types. Given the unexpected effect of item concreteness on source memory, however, it remains unclear whether a cue selectively influencing item memory only would be fully discounted in JOSs.