MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004065068 · doi:10.1037/h0087454

Seeing double: Levels of processing can cause false memory.

2005· article· en· W2004065068 on OpenAlexaff
Antonia Kronlund, Bruce W. A. Whittlesea

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory Processes and Influences
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCognitive psychologyRepetition (rhetorical device)IllusionSemantic memoryLevels-of-processing effectFalse memoryInformation processingInferenceTest (biology)Session (web analytics)Encoding (memory)Word (group theory)CognitionRecallLinguisticsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ordinarily, deeper levels of processing in a study session increase the accuracy of later remembering. We modified the standard levels-of-processing procedure by presenting items either once or twice in the study phase, each item being the subject of a semantic, phonemic, or graphemic question. At test, the subjects judged the frequency with which each word had occurred in the study phase. Deeper processing during encoding increased accuracy in judging twice-presented items. However, it also caused an illusion of repetition for items presented only once. The result underlines the importance of thinking of remembering as a process of evaluation and inference, rather than simple retrieval.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.115
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentaleSame topicMemory Processes and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207