The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Not All People Are Cut Out for Strategic Criterion Shifting
Abstract
Decisions are often based on memory, but memories are often vague and ambiguous. Therefore, one must establish some standard for how strong a memory must feel before it is accepted as part of one’s past. This standard of evidence, called a decision criterion, should be adapted to the demands of a given situation: Sometimes it is critical to accept only strong memories as legitimate, whereas at other times it is more appropriate to act on the basis of relatively weak memory evidence. The ability to shift between these two standards as circumstances warrant is a critical element of successful decision making. We review recent work examining criterion shifting in recognition memory and argue that the true nature of criterion shifting may be seen only at the individual level: Whereas some people shift their criterion quite adaptively, others do not shift at all.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“observers with lower ability tend to adopt more extreme criteria towards the more likely or less costly response”
From A criterion-placement theory of face matching (2026) · cites this paper as Miller & Kantner, 2020
In the citing paper
“individual differences in face-matching ability (i.e., sensitivity) predict criterion shifting under variable conditions”
From A criterion-placement theory of face matching (2026) · cites this paper as Miller & Kantner, 2020
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 21
- 10.3758/s13421-012-0204-6 · DOI
- 10.1186/s41235-018-0150-3 · DOI
- 10.1037/a0014351 · DOI
- 10.3758/s13421-014-0497-8 · DOI
- 10.1093/geronb/gbv039 · DOI
- 10.3758/s13421-016-0633-8 · DOI
- 10.1080/09658211.2017.1393090 · DOI
- Green D. M., 1966, Signal detection theory and psychophysics
- 10.1057/9780230305281_12 · DOI
- 10.3758/s13421-012-0226-0 · DOI
- 10.3758/s13423-014-0608-3 · DOI
- 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01320 · DOI
- 10.1177/0956797614541991 · DOI
- 10.4324/9781410611147 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/acp.3344 · DOI
- 10.1080/13825585.2017.1319144 · DOI
- 10.1037/h0022662 · DOI
- 10.1037/a0029469 · DOI
- 10.3758/s13421-014-0433-y · DOI
- 10.1037/h0028579 · DOI
- 10.1177/1529100616686966 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A criterion-placement theory of face matching
Baker, K. A., Mondloch, C. J., Hancock, P. J. B., & Bindemann, M. (2026) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106319 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Miller, M. B., & Kantner, J.
- Affiliations
- Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara
- Department of Psychology, California State University, Northridge
- Venue
- Current Directions in Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2019-09-24
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 9-15
- ISSN
- 0963-7214
- 1467-8721
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
- Funders
- army research office (W91NF-09-0001)
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: Not All People Are Cut Out for Strategic Criterion Shifting. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0963721419872747
- The paper
- Miller, M. B., & Kantner, J. (2020). Not All People Are Cut Out for Strategic Criterion Shifting. Current Directions in Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721419872747