Cited by 14

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Not All People Are Cut Out for Strategic Criterion Shifting

Miller, Michael B., Kantner, Justin·2020·Current Directions in Psychological Science

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

Crossref · 10.1177/0963721419872747

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 21

  1. 10.3758/s13421-012-0204-6 · DOI
  2. 10.1186/s41235-018-0150-3 · DOI
  3. 10.1037/a0014351 · DOI
  4. 10.3758/s13421-014-0497-8 · DOI
  5. 10.1093/geronb/gbv039 · DOI
  6. 10.3758/s13421-016-0633-8 · DOI
  7. 10.1080/09658211.2017.1393090 · DOI
  8. Green D. M., 1966, Signal detection theory and psychophysics
  9. 10.1057/9780230305281_12 · DOI
  10. 10.3758/s13421-012-0226-0 · DOI
  11. 10.3758/s13423-014-0608-3 · DOI
  12. 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01320 · DOI
  13. 10.1177/0956797614541991 · DOI
  14. 10.4324/9781410611147 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1002/acp.3344 · DOI
  16. 10.1080/13825585.2017.1319144 · DOI
  17. 10.1037/h0022662 · DOI
  18. 10.1037/a0029469 · DOI
  19. 10.3758/s13421-014-0433-y · DOI
  20. 10.1037/h0028579 · DOI
  21. 10.1177/1529100616686966 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

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
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