000148312 001__ 148312
000148312 005__ 20250130163247.0
000148312 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1111/sjop.12369
000148312 0248_ $$2sideral$$a141460
000148312 037__ $$aART-2017-141460
000148312 041__ $$aeng
000148312 100__ $$aLuna, Karlos
000148312 245__ $$aUsing the regulation of accuracy to study performance when the correct answer is not known
000148312 260__ $$c2017
000148312 5060_ $$aAccess copy available to the general public$$fUnrestricted
000148312 5203_ $$aWe examined memory performance in multiple‐choice questions when correct answers were not always present. How do participants answer when they are aware that the correct alternative may not be present? To answer this question we allowed participants to decide on the number of alternatives in their final answer (the plurality option), and whether they wanted to report or withhold their answer (report option). We also studied the memory benefits when both the plurality and the report options were available. In two experiments participants watched a crime and then answered questions with five alternatives. Half of the questions were presented with the correct alternative and half were not. Participants selected one alternative and rated confidence, then selected three alternatives and again rated confidence, and finally indicated whether they preferred the answer with one or with three alternatives (plurality option). Lastly, they decided whether to report or withhold the answer (report option). Results showed that participants’ confidence in their selections was higher, that they chose more single answers, and that they preferred to report more often when the correct alternative was presented. We also attempted to classify a posteriori questions as either presented with or without the correct alternative from participants’ selection. Classification was better than chance, and encouraging, but the forensic application of the classification technique is still limited since there was a large percentage of responses that were incorrectly classified. Our results also showed that the memory benefits of both plurality and report options overlap.
000148312 540__ $$9info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess$$aby-nc-nd$$uhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/
000148312 590__ $$a1.331$$b2017
000148312 591__ $$aPSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY$$b67 / 135 = 0.496$$c2017$$dQ2$$eT2
000148312 592__ $$a0.635$$b2017
000148312 593__ $$aArts and Humanities (miscellaneous)$$c2017$$dQ2
000148312 593__ $$aPsychology (miscellaneous)$$c2017$$dQ2
000148312 593__ $$aMedicine (miscellaneous)$$c2017$$dQ2
000148312 593__ $$aDevelopmental and Educational Psychology$$c2017$$dQ2
000148312 655_4 $$ainfo:eu-repo/semantics/article$$vinfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion
000148312 700__ $$0(orcid)0000-0003-3642-5337$$aMartín-Luengo, Beatriz
000148312 773__ $$g58, 4 (2017), 275-283$$pScand. j. psychol.$$tSCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY$$x0036-5564
000148312 8564_ $$s2682367$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/148312/files/texto_completo.pdf$$yPostprint
000148312 8564_ $$s2152713$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/148312/files/texto_completo.jpg?subformat=icon$$xicon$$yPostprint
000148312 909CO $$ooai:zaguan.unizar.es:148312$$particulos$$pdriver
000148312 951__ $$a2025-01-30-16:31:24
000148312 980__ $$aARTICLE