The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Dual-process theory and signal-detection theory of recognition memory.
Abstract
Two influential models of recognition memory, the unequal-variance signal-detection model and a dual-process threshold/detection model, accurately describe the receiver operating characteristic, but only the latter model can provide estimates of recollection and familiarity. Such estimates often accord with those provided by the remember-know procedure, and both methods are now widely used in the neuroscience literature to identify the brain correlates of recollection and familiarity. However, in recent years, a substantial literature has accumulated directly contrasting the signal-detection model against the threshold/detection model, and that literature is almost unanimous in its endorsement of signal-detection theory. A dual-process version of signal-detection theory implies that individual recognition decisions are not process pure, and it suggests new ways to investigate the brain correlates of recognition memory.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Nature of Recollection and Familiarity: A Review of 30 Years of Research
Yonelinas, A. P. (2002) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1006/jmla.2002.2864 · Cited by 3,840
Recognizing: The judgment of previous occurrence.
Mandler, G. (1980) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037//0033-295x.87.3.252 · Cited by 2,849
Multiple routes to memory: distinct medial temporal lobe processes build item and source memories
Davachi, L., Mitchell, J. P., & Wagner, A. D. (2003) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0337195100 · Cited by 899
Recognition and retrieval processes in free recall.
Anderson, J. R., & Bower, G. H. (1972) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0033773 · Cited by 820
Recollection-like memory retrieval in rats is dependent on the hippocampus
Fortin, N. J., Wright, S. P., & Eichenbaum, H. (2004) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02853 · Cited by 460
Maril, A., Wagner, A. D., & Schacter, D. L. (2001) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/s0896-6273(01)00396-8 · Cited by 235
Chua, E. F., Schacter, D. L., Rand-Giovannetti, E., & Sperling, R. A. (2006) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.09.058 · Cited by 174
Cited by
Overdependence on degraded gist memory in Alzheimer's disease.
Gallo, D. A., Shahid, K. R., Olson, M. A., Solomon, T. M., Schacter, D. L., & Budson, A. E. (2006) · Neuropsychology · doi:10.1037/0894-4105.20.6.625 · Cited by 4,732
The Cognitive Neuroscience of Human Memory Since H.M.
Squire, L. R., & Wixted, J. T. (2011) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev-neuro-061010-113720 · Cited by 749
Self-citationFunctional neuroimaging of autobiographical memory
Cabeza, R., & St Jacques, P. (2007) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2007.02.005 · Cited by 736
Guided Search 6.0: an updated model of visual search
Wolfe, J. M. (2021) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-020-01859-9 · Cited by 703
Recollection and familiarity: Examining controversial assumptions and new directions
Yonelinas, A. P., Aly, M., Wang, W., & Koen, J. D. (2010) · Hippocampus · doi:10.1002/hipo.20864 · Cited by 571
Metadata
- Authors
- Wixted, J. T.
- Venue
- Psychological Review
- Published
- 2007
- Volume
- 114
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 152-176
- ISSN
- 0033-295X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1471
- OpenAlex
- W2049392683
- Cited by
- 951
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 35.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Dual-process theory and signal-detection theory of recognition memory. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/0033-295x.114.1.152
- The paper
- Wixted, J. T. (2007). Dual-process theory and signal-detection theory of recognition memory. Psychological Review. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.114.1.152
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
