Brainerd, C. J., Holliday, R. E.,
& Reyna, V. F. (2004). Behavioral measurement of
remembering phenomenologies: So simple a child can do
it. Child Development, 75, 505-522.
Dual process theories of memory distinguish between two
different subjective experiences (i.e. phenomenologies)
that accompany memory. One phenomenology, typically called recollection,
involves a vivid re-experiencing of event details. The other phenomenology,
typically called familiarity, occurs when participants are confident an item was
presented but
cannot recall specific details of its presentation.
One method of examining these phenomenologies
is provided by Tulving's remember
/ know distinction. In the remember /know task
participants indicate that they "remember" an item if they can
recollect specific details of its presentation and that they know an item if
they are sure it was presented but cannot recall any specific details. The
remember/know judgment task is a useful technique to use with adults, but
requires a level of sophistication that makes it difficult to apply with
children. Brainerd et al. note three problems with applying the technique with
children: (1) the instructions are complicated and require comprehension
abilities that may be beyond most kids, (2) the instructions may tax kids
limited memory capacities and (3) the instructions may require a level of
introspection that are beyond the abilities of most kids.
The authors thus propose using a multinomial model called
conjoint recognition to obtain estimates of recollection and familiarity in
children. In conjoint recognition
participants are presented with items at study and then are provided with a
test containing three types of items: Targets, Related lures, and Unrelated lures. The
participants take the test under one of three types of instructions:
V Instructions: Accept only targets
and reject related lures and unrelated lures
G Instructions: Accept only related
lures, and reject both targets and unrelated lures
VG Instructions: Accept both targets
and related lures but reject unrelated lutes
Crossing the three types of items with the three types of
instructions yields 9 empirical probabilities.
The model provides a mapping between a set of internal mental processes
and these 9 empirical probabilities.
First consider the reasons people might accept a target
under the three sets of instructions.
According to conjoint the probability of accepting a target will be a
function of three basic mental processes:
Target Recollection (RT)
Familiarity based acceptance of
targets (FT)
Response bias (BV, BG,
BVG): With a different response bias for
each of the three types of instructions
Under the V instructions recollection should lead to the acceptance of targets, under the G instructions recollection should lead to the rejection of targets, and under the VG instructions recollection should lead to the acceptance of targets. Familiarity and response bias should both lead to target acceptance. Hence the equations for the three instruction sets should be:
Pt, V = RT+ (1- RT)FT + (1- RT)(1-FT) BV
Pt, G = (1- RT)FT + (1- RT)(1-FT) BG
Pt, VG = RT+
(1- RT)FT + (1- RT)(1-FT)
BVG
Next consider the reasons people might accept a related
lure under the three sets of instructions.
According to conjoint the probability of accepting a related lure will
be a function of three basic mental processes:
Recollection of the related lure's
instantiating target (RR)
Familiarity based acceptance of the
related lure (FT)
Response bias (BV, BG,
BVG): With a different response bias for
each of the three types of instructions
Under the V instructions recollection should lead to the rejection of related lures (i.e. recollection rejection), under the G instructions recollection should lead to the acceptance of related lures, and under the VG instructions recollection should lead to the acceptance of related lures. Familiarity and response bias should both lead to related lure acceptance. Hence the equations for the three instruction sets should be:
Pr V = (1- Rr)Fr + (1- Rr)(1-Fr)BV
Pr, G = Rr + (1- Rr)Fr + (1- Rr)(1-Fr)BG
Pr, VG = Rr + (1- Rr)Fr + (1- Rr)(1-Fr)BVG
Lastly, consider the reasons people might accept an
unrelated lure under the three sets of instructions. According to conjoint the probability of
accepting an unrelated lure will be a function of response bias
Response bias (BV, BG,
BVG): With a different response bias for
each of the three types of instructions
So the equations corresponding to the three instructional conditions will be:
Pu V = BV
Pu, G = BG
Pu,
VG = BVG
One addendum to the above model is that the conjoint recognition model recognizes that sometimes false acceptance of related lures can be accompanied by the phenomenology of recollection. Brainerd et al. have coined the term phantom recollection to refer to this vivid and detail but false recollection. If phantom recollection (Pr) is occurring the equations for acceptance of related lures become the following:
Pr V = (1- Rr)Pr + (1- Rr)(1-Pr)Fr + (1- Rr)(1-Pr)(1-Fr)BV
Pr, G = Rr + (1- Rr)(1-Pr)Fr + (1- Rr)(1-Pr)(1-Fr)BG
Pr, VG = Rr + (1- Rr)Pr + (1- Rr)(1-Pr)Fr + (1- Rr)(1-Pr)(1-Fr)BVG
With those theoretical preliminaries out of the way, Brainerd et al. described two experiments designed to understand how memory phenomenologies develop as kids get older.
Experiment 1.
In Experiment 1, the DRM paradigm was used. The participants were 7, 11, and 14-year-olds. They listened to a set of DRM lists and then took a recognition test under one of three sets of instructions. The test included targets, critical lures, missing exemplars, and unrelated lures.
The major findings were: (1) Recollection of targets increased substantially between ages 11 and 14. (2) familiarity based acceptance of targets did not increase with age (3) Recollection rejection increased with age (4) familiarity based acceptance of related lures increased with age (4) phantom recollection increased with age
Experiment 2
In Experiment 2 the authors made a number of changes. First, instead of DRM lists that used lists of category exemplars. Second, they included a younger age group (5 year olds), and lastly they included a gist cuing manipulation. This manipulation involved providing a category label to the children (e.g. Now you'll hear some furniture).
The major findings were: (1) Both target recollection and recollection rejection increased with age (2) Familiarity based acceptances of both targets and related lures increased with age (3) phantom recollection decreased with age (4) gist cuing decreased recollection rejection (5) gist cuing increased familiarity based acceptances (6) gist cuing increased recollection rejection.
General Discussion
Major contributions of this article:
This article demonstrated that it is possible to use the conjoint methodology and get sensible results with kids as young as five years old, children that are too young to study with self-report methodologies.
The results suggest large age related increases in the use of recollection among children. This is true both with regard to memory for targets and recollection rejection of related lures.Thus there is a vague to vivid developmental trend apparent in these data.