ArticleBehavior research methods2022
Troubled past: A critical psychometric assessment of the self-report Survey of Autobiographical Memory (SAM).
Article in Behavior research methods, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unfolding Nostalgia: Spatial Visualization, Nostalgia, and Well-Being.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The role of subjective interoception in autobiographical deficits in aphantasia.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- WAND: A multi-modal dataset integrating advanced MRI, MEG, and TMS for multi-scale brain analysis.Scientific data · 2025Article
- Attention and spatial navigation in everyday life: Physical activity is associated with subjective aspects of cognitive function.PloS one · 2025Article
- Intrinsic functional connectivity in medial temporal lobe networks is associated with susceptibility to misinformation.Memory (Hove, England) · 2024Article
- TractGeoNet: A geometric deep learning framework for pointwise analysis of tract microstructure to predict language assessment performance.Medical image analysis · 2024Article
- Taking stock of the past: A psychometric evaluation of the Autobiographical Interview.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
- Intrinsic functional connectivity among memory networks does not predict individual differences in narrative recall.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Temporal pole volume is associated with episodic autobiographical memory in healthy older adults.Hippocampus · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Survey of Autobiographical Memory (SAM) was designed as an easy-to-administer measure of self-perceived autobiographical memory (AM) recollection capacity. We provide a comprehensive psychometric evaluation of the SAM in younger and older adults. First, we evaluated the reliability of the SAM as a measure of self-perceived recollective capacity. Next, we tested whether the SAM was a valid measure of episodic and autobiographical memory performance, as assessed with widely used performance-based measures. Finally, we investigated associations between the SAM, cognitive measures and self-reported assessments of psychological functioning. The SAM demonstrated reliability as a self-report measure of perceived recollective capacity. High internal consistency was observed across subscales, with the exception of SAM-semantic. Evidence for independence among the subscales was mixed: SAM-episodic and SAM-semantic items showed poor correspondence with respective subscales. Good correspondence was observed between the future and spatial items and their SAM subscales. The SAM showed limited associations with AM performance as measured by the Autobiographical Interview (AI), yet was broadly associated with self-reported AI event vividness. SAM scores were weakly associated with performance-based memory measures and were age-invariant, inconsistent with known age effects on declarative memory. Converging evidence indicated that SAM-episodic and SAM-semantic subscales are not independent and should not be interpreted as specific measures of episodic or semantic memory. The SAM was robustly associated with self-efficacy, suggesting an association with confidence in domain general self-report abilities. We urge caution in the use and interpretation of the SAM as a measure of AM, pending revision and further psychometric validation.
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.