Cited by 82Memory Processes and InfluencesMemory and Neural MechanismsCognitive Functions and Memory

Distinguishing between the success and precision of recollection

Open access
Harlow, Iain M., Yonelinas, Andrew P.·2016·Memory

Abstract

Recollection reflects the retrieval of complex qualitative information about prior events. Recently, Harlow and Donaldson developed a method for separating the probability of recollection success from the precision of the mnemonic information retrieved. In the current study, we ask if these properties are separable on the basis of subjective reports-are participants aware of these two aspects of recollection and can they reliably report on them? Participants studied words paired with a location on a circle outline, and at test recalled the location for a given word as accurately as possible. Additionally, participants provided separate subjective ratings of recollection confidence and recollection precision. The results indicated that participants either recollected the target location with considerable (but variable) precision or retrieved no accurate location information at all. Importantly, recollection confidence reliably predicted whether locations were recollected, while precision ratings instead reflected the precision of the locations retrieved. The results demonstrate the experimental separability of recollection success and precision, and highlight the importance of disentangling these two different aspects of recollection when examining episodic memory.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09658211.2014.988162

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Harlow, I. M., & Yonelinas, A. P.
Affiliations
University of California, Davis (US)
Corresponding author
Harlow, Iain M.
Venue
Memory
Published
2014-12-13
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
114-127
ISSN
  • 0965-8211 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-0686
OpenAlex
W1995113287
Cited by
82
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1
FWCI
1.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Memory (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (MH083734)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
recollection, episodic memory, spatial memory, location recall, memory retrieval
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Mental Recall, Reproducibility of Results, Young Adult, Memory, Episodic

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