The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Three regularities of recognition memory: the role of bias
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.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“For example, in a recognition memory test for names, a naturally occurring bias to classify names as 'unfamiliar' reduces the mirror effect.”
From A criterion-placement theory of face matching (2026) · cites this paper as Hilford et al., 2015
In the citing paper
“Notably, the mirror effect is also attenuated by response biases, such as a tendency to categorise items as 'new' under conditions of uncertainty.”
From A criterion-placement theory of face matching (2026) · cites this paper as Hilford et al., 2015
In the citing paper
“the success of such a strategy would be dependent on the shift in question driving all participants (or items) towards a neutral bias or in the same direction”
From A criterion-placement theory of face matching (2026) · cites this paper as Hilford et al., 2015
In the citing paper
“Regardless, the findings here suggest that, much like the match-mismatch dissociation shown in the previous studies and stimulations, the dissociation in hits and correct rejections that is often observed in old/new recognition tasks is also influenced by bias-an effect that was hinted at within the recognition memory literature (Hilford et al., 2015).”
From A criterion-placement theory of face matching (2026) · cites this paper as Hilford et al., 2015
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
Cohen, J. (1983) · Applied Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/014662168300700301 · Cited by 1,564 · cited 1×
“Cohen (1983) has demonstrated the loss of power that occurs when multiple-valued scales are reduced to dichotomies.”
Background
Research works printed but not linked: 35
- Bäckman, L. (1991). Recognition memory across the adult life span: The role of prior knowledge. Memory & Cognition, 19, 63–71. · DOI
- Bäckman, L., & Herlitz, A. (1990). The relationship between prior knowledge and face recognition in normal aging and Alzheimer’s disease. Journal of Gerontology, 45, 94–100. · DOI
- Balota, D. A., Burgess, G. C., Cortese, M. J., & Adams, D. R. (2002). The word-frequency mirror effect in young, old and early-stage Alzheimer’s disease: Evidence for two processes in episodic recognition performance. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 199–226. · DOI
- Bartlett, J. C., Halpern, A. R., & Dowling, W. J. (1995). Recognition of familiar and unfamiliar melodies in normal aging and Alzheimer’s disease. Memory & Cognition, 23, 531–546. · DOI
- Brown, J., Lewis, V. J., & Monk, A. F. (1977). Memorability, word frequency and negative recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 29, 461–473. · DOI
- Cary, M., & Reder, L. M. (2003). A dual-process account of the list-length and strength-based mirror effects in recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 231–248. · DOI
- Dorfman, D., & Glanzer, M. (1988). List composition effects in lexical decision and recognition memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 633–648. · DOI
- Egan, J. P. (1975). Signal detection theory and ROC analysis. New York: Academic Press.
- Estes, W. K. (1956). The problem of inference from curves based on group data. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 134–140. · DOI
- Estes, W. K., & Maddox, W. T. (2005). Risks of drawing inferences about cognitive processes from model fits to individual versus average performance. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 403–408. · DOI
- Glanzer, M., & Adams, J. K. (1985). The mirror effect in recognition memory. Memory & Cognition, 13, 8–20. · DOI · Paper page
- Glanzer, M., & Adams, J. K. (1990). The mirror effect in recognition memory: Data and theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 5–16.
- Glanzer, M., Adams, J. K., Iverson, G. J., & Kim, K. (1993). The regularities of recognition memory. Psychological Review, 100, 546–567. · DOI
- Glanzer, M., Adams, J. K., & Iverson, G. (1991). Forgetting and the mirror effect in recognition memory: Concentering of underlying distributions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 81–89.
- Glanzer, M., Hilford, A., & Maloney, L. T. (2009). Likelihood ratio decisions in memory: Three implied regularities. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 431–455. · DOI · Paper page
- Glanzer, M., Kim, K., Hilford, A., & Adams, J. K. (1999). Slope of the receiver-operating characteristic in recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 500–513.
- Hilford, A., Glanzer, M., & Kim, K. (1997). Encoding, repetition, and the mirror effect in recognition memory: Symmetry in motion. Memory & Cognition, 25, 593–605. · DOI
- Hoshino, Y. (1991). A bias in favor of the positive response to high-frequency words in recognition memory. Memory & Cognition, 19, 607–616. · DOI
- Kim, K., & Glanzer, M. (1995). Intralist interference in recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 1096–1107.
- Laming, D. (1973). Mathematical psychology. New York: Academic Press.
- Malmberg, K. J., & Murnane, K. (2002). List composition and the word-frequency effect fir recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 610–630.
- Marr, D. (1982). Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company.
- McClelland, J. L., & Chappell, M. (1998). Familiarity breeds differentiation: A subjective-likelihood approach to the effects of experience in recognition memory. Psychological Review, 4, 724–760. · DOI
- Mickes, L., Wixted, J. T., & Wais, P. E. (2007). A direct test of the unequal-variance signal detection model of recognition memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 858–865. · DOI
- Pratte, M. S., Rouder, J. N., & Morey, R. D. (2010). Separating mnemonic process from participant and item effects in the assessment of ROC asymmetries. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 224–232.
- Ratcliff, R., McKoon, G., & Tindall, M. (1994). Empirical generality of data from recognition receiver-operating characteristic functions and implications for the global memory models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 763–785.
- Ratcliff, R., Sheu, C.-F., & Gronlund, S. D. (1992). Testing global models using ROC curves. Psychological Review, 99, 518–535. · DOI
- Rouder, J. N., Pratte, M. S., & Morey, R. D. (2010). Latent mnemonic strengths are latent: A comment on Mickes, Wixted, and Wais (2007). Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 17, 427–435. · DOI
- Schulman, A. I. (1976). Memory for rare words previously rated for familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 2, 301–307.
- Shiffrin, R. M., Huber, D., & Marinelli, K. (1995). Effects of category length and strength on familiarity in recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 267–287.
- Shiffrin, R. M., & Steyvers, M. (1997). A model for recognition memory: REM—Retrieving effectively from memory. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 4, 145–166. · DOI
- Stretch, V., & Wixted, J. T. (1998). Decision rules for recognition memory confidence judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 1397–1410.
- Wickens, T. D. (2002). Elementary signal detection theory. New York: Oxford University.
- Wixted, J. T., & Mickes, L. (2010). Useful scientific theories are useful: A reply to Rouder, Pratte, and Morey (2010). Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 17, 436–442. · DOI
- Wright, C. E. (1979). Duration differences between rare and common words and their implications for the interpretation of word frequency effects. Memory & Cognition, 7, 411–419. · DOI
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
- Hilford, A., Maloney, L. T., Glanzer, M., & Kim, K.
- Venue
- Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
- Published
- 2015-05-02
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1646-1664
- ISSN
- 1069-9384
- 1531-5320
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 1
- Language
- en
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
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
