Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-7262s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-15T15:32:53.558Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Memory, metamemory, and conditional statistics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 February 2010

Robert A. Bjork
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1563. rabjork@psych.ucla.edu; twickens@psych.ucla.edu
Thomas D. Wickens
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1563. rabjork@psych.ucla.edu; twickens@psych.ucla.edu

Abstract

Koriat & Goldsmith's distinction between encoding processes and metamnemonic decision processes is theoretically and practically important, as is their methodology for separating the two. However, their accuracy measure is a conditional statistic, subject to the unfathomable selection effects that have hindered analogous measures in the past. We also find their arguments concerning basic and applied research mostly beside the point.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable