ReviewQuarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)2024
Subjective memory measures: Metamemory questionnaires currently in use.
Review in Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effect of subjective perception of memory and objective cognitive performance on negative affective symptoms in older adults.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Service touchpoint assessment and optimization of online meeting platforms on the basis of an experiential memory model.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Subjective memory complaints in people with epilepsy: Are there "signature" complaints associated with anxiety and depression?Epilepsia open · 2025Article
- Associations between low food security and subjective memory complaints among Latino adults.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Predictors of subjective memory functioning in young adults.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Data-driven natural computational psychophysiology in class.Cognitive neurodynamics · 2024Article
- The Subjective Memory Complaints Questionnaire: a systematic review of psychometric properties, clinical applications, and neurobiological correlates.Alzheimer's & dementia (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Subjective memory evaluation is important for assessing memory abilities and complaints alongside objective measures. In research and clinical settings, questionnaires are used to examine perceived memory ability, memory complaints, and memory beliefs/knowledge. Although they provide a structured measure of self-reported memory, there is some debate as to whether subjective evaluation accurately reflects memory abilities. Specifically, the disconnect between subjective and objective memory measures remains a long-standing issue within the field. Thus, it is essential to evaluate the benefits and limitations of questionnaires that are currently in use. This review encompasses three categories of metamemory questionnaires: self-efficacy, complaints, and multidimensional questionnaires. Factors influencing self-evaluation of memory including knowledge and beliefs about memory, ability to evaluate memory, recent metamemory experiences, and affect are examined. The relationship between subjective and objective memory measures is explored, and considerations for future development and use of metamemory questionnaires are provided.
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.