Whom to trust? Inferred source credibility and response borrowing in a memory task.

We investigated whether people can discriminate between sources of information that are either credible or respond at random, based only on their own knowledge and the responses provided by these sources. In three experiments, participants were asked to judge the validity of trivia statements. Some statements were accompanied by true/false responses provided by either a credible source or a source whose responses were random. In Experiment 1, participants first saw a set of easy questions, which provided the basis for assessing the relative credibility of the sources, before responding to a set of difficult questions, where response borrowing was assessed. In Experiments 2 and 3, participants solved a test composed of difficult questions only, but only after studying the correct responses to all these questions. In Experiment 2, there was no delay between the study and test phases, whereas in Experiment 3, the delay was 24 hours. In all experiments, more participants explicitly identified the more credible source in the postexperimental questionnaire than misidentified the noninformative source as credible. However, differentiated response borrowing-borrowing more responses from the credible than the noninformative source-emerged only in Experiment 2. Therefore, people can often explicitly infer source credibility from the responses the sources provide. However, using these inferences to regulate response borrowing is relatively less likely and happens only under specific, favorable circumstances.

Should I keep studying? Consequences of a decision to stop learning in young and older adults.

In situations of cognitive overload, the role of a metacognitive decision to stop learning is of utmost importance. We investigated how young and older adults decide to stop learning as a strategy for maximizing memory performance when they face to-be-learned material exceeding their memory capability. People may decide to stop learning for two main reasons: they experience a growing feeling of disfluency as a learning episode progresses and/or they perceive such a decision to be beneficial for future memory performance. In Experiments 1 and 2, participants studied lists of 50 words. The majority of young and older adults stopped learning in conditions where they were allowed to do so. This decision, counterintuitively, decreased the number of recalled words. Crucially, a similar number of young and older adults stopped the presentation of to-be-remembered material, and both age groups suffered comparable consequences in their memory performance. In Experiments 3a and 3b, participants read an experimental scenario and decided whether they would stop learning based on this description alone. People in different age groups predicted their metacognitive decisions similarly. However, participants' forecasted performance did not reflect the negative influence of these decisions. Regardless of their age, people tend to make a suboptimal decision to stop learning, unaware of its negative consequences. Together, our results suggest that young and older adults can exert metamemory control to similar degrees even though their decisions may not be beneficial for memory performance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Translating (lack of) memories into reports: Conversion processes in responding to unanswerable questions.

When queried about events in the past, a person may face questions that concern details that have been witnessed-answerable questions-and details that have not been witnessed-unanswerable questions. With regard to answerable questions, the person's willingness to answer these questions increases as a function of not only information available about the queried detail itself, but also as a function of contextual information. The present research assesses whether the willingness to report specific-and thus incorrect-answers when facing unanswerable questions also increases with the amount of available contextual information. In 3 experiments, we show that when recognition questions for critical details one had not encoded are preceded by reinstated contexts, participants are less willing to respond "don't know" to these questions, thus making more commission errors. These results show how greater access to contextual information, commonly associated with better memory for answerable questions, can also lead to more incorrect responses in the case of unanswerable questions. This documents how conversion processes-metacognitive processes of monitoring retrieval from memory and controlling the quality of output-play an important role in shaping the accuracy of memory reports. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Memory, metamemory, and social cues: Between conformity and resistance.

When presented with responses of another person, people incorporate these responses into memory reports: a finding termed memory conformity. Research on memory conformity in recognition reveals that people rely on external social cues to guide their memory responses when their own ability to respond is at chance. In this way, conforming to a reliable source boosts recognition performance but conforming to a random source does not impair it. In the present study we assessed whether people would conform indiscriminately to reliable and unreliable (random) sources when they are given the opportunity to exercise metamemory control over their responding by withholding answers in a recognition test. In Experiments 1 and 2, we found the pattern of memory conformity to reliable and unreliable sources in 2 variants of a free-report recognition test, yet at the same time the provision of external cues did not affect the rate of response withholding. In Experiment 3, we provided participants with initial feedback on their recognition decisions, facilitating the discrimination between the reliable and unreliable source. This led to the reduction of memory conformity to the unreliable source, and at the same time modulated metamemory decisions concerning response withholding: participants displayed metamemory conformity to the reliable source, volunteering more responses in their memory report, and metamemory resistance to the random source, withholding more responses from the memory report. Together, the results show how metamemory decisions dissociate various types of memory conformity and that memory and metamemory decisions can be independent of each other.