Self-referential encoding of source information in recollection memory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Information that is encoded in relation to the self has been shown to be better remembered, yet reports have disagreed on whether the memory benefit from self-referential encoding extends to source memory (the context in which information was learned). In this study, we investigated the self-referential effect on source memory in recollection and familiarity-based memory. Using a Remember/Know paradigm, we compared source memory accuracy under self-referential encoding and semantic encoding. Two types of source information were included, a "peripheral" source which was not inherent to the encoding activity, and a source information about the encoding context. We observed the facilitation in item memory from self-referential encoding compared to semantic encoding in recollection but not in familiarity-based memory. The self-referential benefit to source accuracy was observed in recollection memory, with source memory for the encoding context being stronger in the self-referential condition. No significant self-referential effect was observed with regards to peripheral source information (information not required for the participant to focus on), suggesting not all source information benefit from self-referential encoding. Self-referential encoding also resulted in a higher ratio of "Remember/Know" responses rate than semantically encoded items, denoting stronger recollection. These results suggest self-referential encoding creates a richer, more detailed memory trace which can be recollected later on.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".