ArticleRoyal Society open science2021
Examining the relationship between processing fluency and memory for source information.
Article in Royal Society open science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Examining the relationship between processing fluency and memory for source information.Royal Society open science · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Familiarity-based processes such as processing fluency can influence memory judgements in tests of item recognition. Many conventional accounts of source memory assume minimal influence of familiarity on source memory, but recent work has suggested that source memory judgements are affected when test stimuli are processed with greater fluency as a result of priming. The present experiments investigated the relationship between fluency and the accuracy of source memory decisions. Participants studied words presented with different source attributes. During test, they identified words that gradually clarified on screen through progressive demasking, made old/new and source memory judgements, and reported confidence ratings for those words. Response times (RTs) recorded from the item identification task formed the basis of a fluency measure, and identification RTs were compared across categories of item recognition, source accuracy and confidence. Identification RTs were faster in trials with correct retrieval of source information compared with trials for which source could not be accurately retrieved. These findings are consistent with the assumption that familiarity-based processes are related to source memory judgements.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.