1. Lecture 17 – Psyco 350, B1 Fall, 2011 N. R. Brown

2. Psyco 350 Lec #15– Slide 2 Outline 1.Autobiographical Memory – Part 2 2. The Partner Discrepancy – Part 2

3. Studying E-to-E Organization: Event-cueing Brown & Schopflocher (1998) General Method: Cueing event: auto event 1 [E 1 ]  Cued event: auto event 2 [E 2 ] Assumption: E 1 & E 2 often associated Implication: pattern of E 1  E 2 relations reflects underlying organization

4. Brown & Schopflocher (1998) Two groups (during Phase 1 only): word-cued group important-event group Five Phases: 1.generate cueing events 2.event-cueing task 3.relations-coding task 4.event-dating task 5.Importance-rating task

5. Phase 1 Important-Events Condition E 1 acquisition: Prompt event 1 [E 1 ] task: to recall important personal event (e.g., my mom and telling me that my dad was going to move out) 14 trials Retrieval time was measured Memories (E 1 s) were typed 72 undergrads

6. Phase 1 Word-Cue Condition E 1 acquisition: Cue word event 1 [E 1 ] task: to recall a personal event related to the cue word CAR when I was 15, I stole a car. 14 nouns Retrieval time was measured Memories (E1s) were typed 73 undergrads

7. Phase 2 Event-cueing Task Identical for both important-events and word- cue conditions E 2 acquisition: event 1 [E 1 ] event 2 [E 2 ] My mom and dad telling me my dad was going to move out [E 1 ] Dad leaving a note on my pillow saying bye [E 2 ]. All E 1 s served as cues Retrieval time was measured Memories (E 2 s) were typed

8. Phase 3 Relation-Coding Task Identical for both important-events and word- cue conditions [E1 & E2] + Relation Menu Select relation(s) All event pairs scored Unrestricted selection Untimed

9. Phase 3 Relation-Coding Task Event A: My mom and dad telling me my dad was going to move out. Event B: Dad leaving a note on my pillow saying bye –Did event A and B involve the same person or persons? –Did event A and B involve the same activity? –Did event A and B involve the same location? –Did one of the events cause the other? –Is one of the events part of the other? –Are both events part of a single broader event? –Are event A and event B related in some other way?

10. Phase 4 Event Dating Task Identical for both conditions E x Date for E x My mom and dad was telling me my dad was going to move out June 30, 1986 All events dated Random presentation Untimed

11. Phase 5 Importance Rating Task Identical for both conditions E x Importance rating for E x (1-to-5 scale) My mom and dad was telling me my dad was going to move out 5 All events rated Random presentation Untimed

12. Horizontal Organization: Two General Positions Special Narrative Processing Position created ONLY by narrative processing given to important life stories Matter-of-Course Position normal memory processing higher-level cognitive processing –planning, evaluation, comprehension narration

13. Competing Predictions Narrative Position: Only important events will frequently cue cluster mates. Matter-of-course Position: Important and unimportant events will frequently cue cluster mates

14. B&S Results: Event Age

15. B&S: Results Defining clustered Pairs: Clustered Pairs: –Either cause, subevent, or "same story" relation indicated. Nonclustered Pairs: –Neither cause, subevent, nor "same story" relation indicated. % Clustered: Important-Events Group: 81% Word-Cued Group: 75%

16. B&S Results: Clustering & Importance

17. B&S Results: Clustered vs Nonclustered Pairs Median Time(sec) to Retrieve Cued event (E 2 ) important- event word-cued clustered6.86.6 nonclustered8.48.2 important- event word-cued clustered2.01.0 nonclustered210.5319.5 Median Difference(Days) between Cueing (E 1 ) & Cued Event (E 2 )

18. B&S Results: Clustered vs Nonclustered Pairs Interevent Relations as a Function of Clustering Same Person Same Location Same Activity Other clustered54%52%39%16% nonclustered44%33%32%

19. Summary Main Claims: Event clusters very common Clustered events: –causally & thematically related –temporally proximate Evidence: 80% clustered RT: clustered < nonclustered Age  s: clustered << nonclustered Overlapping story elements: –clustered > nonclustered

20. Interpreting Event Clusters A Strong Narrative Position Event clusters are narratives. Narrative processes necessary for creation/ maintenance of autobiographical memory.

21. Interpreting Event Clusters A Comprise Position Clustering prompted by: –temporal contiguity –similarity –causal reasoning –goal directed planning and evaluation Narrative creation/maintenance facilitated by clustering

22. Retrieval Processes in Autobiographical Memory (Uzer, Lee & Brown, 2011) –Generative retrieval –Direct retrieval Generative retrieval has been assumed as a normative form of retrieval Models of Autobiographical memory (AM) assume two retrieval strategies:

23. –Concrete nouns < emotion terms –Personal periods < common activities –Common activities < general actions Introduction Retrieval processes: Reaction time (RT) Studies have shown:

24. –As an index of effort required to generate appropriate cues –Generation is easy and fast, when cue accesses to associative links –Generation is slower and harder, when cue must be reformulated to access to associative links Introduction RT differences:

25. –RT differences reflect multiple retrieval strategies –RTs reflect weighted blend of generative and direct retrieval modes Introduction Dual Retrieval Strategies Approach:

26. How common are direct and generative retrieval? Would retrieval strategy change as a function of task conditions (e.g., the types of cues provided)? Would RT differences still occur holding retrieval strategy constant? Current Questions

27. 40 U of A undergraduate students Within-subjects design Procedure: Cue word : “specific personal event that is related to the cue word” Two types of cue words: –Concrete nouns (e.g., chair, pencil, book) –Emotion terms (e.g., shy, happy, sad) Exp 1: Method

28. Concurrent verbal protocols:“Think out loud by verbalizing all your thoughts as you are thinking them” Pressing SPACEBAR as memory is retrieved (RT) Strategy Report: Participants were asked if the memory came directly into mind - “Y” for YES or “N” for NO Brief written report of memory Exp 1: Method

29. Exp 1: Results

30. Exp 1: Method

33. Concurrent verbal protocols: Reactivity to generative retrieval “Did this memory came immediately to mind” might create a demand for directly retrieved memories. Exp 1: Issues

34. 300 U of A undergraduate students Procedure: Cue-words ---- AM (Identical to Exp 1.) Pressing SPACEBAR as memory is retrieved (RT) Exp 2: Method

35. Strategy Report: Cond. 1 (Direct): “Did the memory come immediately to mind” Yes or No responses Cond. 2 (Generative ) : “Did you actively search to recall this memory?” Yes or No responses Cond. 3 (Both Option): “How did you retrieve this memory?” -The memory came immediately to mind -I actively searched to recall the memory -I cannot decide between the two options listed above Exp 2: Method

40. Problems: Participants might be deciding about their retrieval strategies based on time. Asking people whether memory directly came to mind or you searched is confounded with time. When you directly retrieve it is fast when you search it takes time. Exp 2: Issues

41. Another approach: looking at “use of information”. Direct Retrieval: You don’t use any information to find the memory, the memory comes straight to your mind. Generative Retrieval: To find the memory you have to search for/use some type of information (e.g., people in your life, any time period, places you have been, etc). Exp 3: Rationale

42. 300 U of A undergraduate students Procedure: Cue-words ---- AM (Identical to Exp 1.) Pressing SPACEBAR as memory is retrieved (RT) Exp 3: Method

43. Strategy Report: Condition 1 (Direct Cond.):“This memory was triggered by the cue word so I did not have to use information about my life to help me recall this memory.” Yes or No responses Yes: Direct Retrieval Exp 3: Method

44. Strategy Report: Condition 2 (Generative Cond.) : “This memory wasn’t triggered by the cue word so I had to use information about my life to help me recall this memory.” Yes or No responses Yes: Generative Retrieval Exp 3: Method

49. Showed the prevalence of direct retrieval in autobiographical memory Utility of using retrieval strategy and RT measures to interpret RT differences in retrieving autobiographical memories, Accounted for cue type effect in autobiographical memory retrieval Significance and Future Questions

51. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 51 Experimental Summary Multiple strategies Strategy selection restricted by memory contents Bias & Strategy related: enumeration  underestimation rough aprox  overestimation

52. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 52 Lifetime Partner Discrepancy from the MSP Multiple strategies: Enumeration Rough Approximation Others(?) Strategy & magnitude related. enumeration < rough aprox Strategy selection related to sex Enumeration: ♀ > ♂ Rough Aprox: ♂ > ♀

53. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 53 MSP Predictions – Past Year Estimates Comparable past-year reports Multiple strategies used Strategy & magnitude related Strategy & sex of respondent unrelated

54. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 54 A Questionnaire Study: Brown & Sinclair (1999) Method: Demographics SP reports: –lifetime estimate & written strategy report –past-year estimate & written strategy report Attitude measures

55. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 55 A Questionnaire Study: Brown & Sinclair (1999) Participants: University Students: AB, PA, NJ 1036 ♀ 687 ♂ Age: M = 20.7 MD = 19

56. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 56 Distribution of SP Estimates -- AlbertaQ

57. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 57 Sexual Active Subset -- AlbertaQ Most active 10%; SP  8 Heterosexual 90 Females Age: md = 22 SPs: m = 13.61 85 Males Age: md = 23 SPs: m = 19.91

58. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 58 SP Est– Sexaul Active Subset -- AlbertaQ

59. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 59 Protocol Content – AlbertaQ

60. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 60 Sample Protocols -- AlbertaQ Enumeration (Retrieve & Count) "By retracing chronologically the partners I've had. Beginning with the first, ending with the present." -- M, 20 "I recalled and counted." -- F, 18 "Counted all the names I remembered." -- F, 11 "I can recall who they were and can count them." -- F, 15

61. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 61 Sample Protocols -- AlbertaQ Rough Approximation “Rough guess, give or take 1 or 2 partners." -- M, 16 "Rough estimate plus-or-minus error 5" -- M, 20 "I used to keep count. # has slowed down is likely about there" -- M, "30 (or so)“ "It is a guess based on the amount of partners I have had at the minimum.“ -- M, 50

62. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 62 Sample Protocols -- AlbertaQ Retrieved Tally "Keep track of them as they occurred." -- M, 21 "I know the number without thinking as it has been previously discussed among friends“-- M, 10 "I didn't estimate. I've kept count."-- F, 11 "I kept track in my diary and I know that my boyfriend is #27." -- F, 27

63. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 63 Sample Protocols -- AlbertaQ Rate "Avg of 5/year from 16-21, then remained monogamous." -- M, 25 "The average length of relationship since the time I became sexually active." -- M, 20 Ambiguous/Unclear "Memory." -- M, 22“ “I remember them."-- M, 10

64. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 64 Strategy Usage – Sexual Active – AlbertaQ EN = ENumeration TA = TAlly AP= rough APproximation AM = AMbiguous

65. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 65 MD Lifetime SPs X Strategy Sexual Active AlbertaQ EN = ENumeration TA = TAlly AM = AMbiguous AP= rough APproximation

66. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 66 Past-Year Estimates Male (m=3.45)  Female (m=2.58) Multiple strategies used. Strategy use & SP related No relation between sex & strategy

67. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 67 Summary Lifetime Estimates ♂ SPs > ♀ SPs Multiple strategies used. Strategy & magnitude related enumeration < rough aprox Sex & strategy related. enumeration:♀ > ♂ rough aprox: ♂ > ♀ Conclusion: MSP accounts for discrepancy

68. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 68 Summary: Past-Year Estimates ♂ SPs  ♀ SPs Multiple strategies used. Strategy & magnitude related Sex & strategy unrelated. Implications: bad faith responses unlikely ♂ & ♀ from same sample

69. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 69 USA Population Surveys-- Tess

70. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 70 USA Population Surveys – TessW & TessT TESS -- Time-sharing Experiments for the Social Sciences NSF funded program – Survey-based Experiments

71. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 71 USA Web-based Surveys – TessW & TessT Motivations: 1.Replication 2.Modality Effects 3.Assess impact of self-screening questions 4.Assess strategy manipulations

72. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 72 USA Web-based Surveys – TessW & TessT US data collection: 2004 TessT: Sample: stratified sample; random digit dialed telephone survey TessW -- Knowledge Network Panel: RDD  recruit panel members Members receive free hardware & internet service Sample drawn at random from panel. Data collect via web-based questionnaire.

73. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 73 Method -- Tess 1.Estimates # of SP – Three Versions 2.Indicated estimation strategy – Strategy Menu 3.Sexual orientation 4.Two attitude questions 5.Rate embarrassment 6.Rate truthfulness of response 7.Rate bias of responses

74. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 74 Method -- TessW 1.Estimates # of SP – Three Versions Control: “Please report your number of lifetime sexual partners” Approx: “Off the top of your head, please provide a rough estimate of your number of lifetime sexual partners.” Enum: “Please think back over your lifetime starting with your first sexual partner and count all of your sexual partners up to and including your most recent partner.”

75. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 75 Method -- Tess 2. Indicated estimation strategy – Strategy Menu I just now thought back over my lifetime and tried to remember and count each sexual partner. I made a rough guess, plus or minus a few sexual partners. It was a very small number, so I just knew. I keep a running tally of my number of sexual partners and I remembered this number (for example, I use a diary or I have been keeping track in my head over time). I thought about the number of different sexual partners who I’ve been with in an average year and multiplied by the number of years that I’ve been sexually active (for example, about 5 a year for 5 years equals 25) I used some other method to come up with my response. Please specify :

76. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 76 Method -- Tess 3. First Attitude Question I believe a relationship should form before someone has sex. 1=Agree 2=Disagree 3=Neither strongly somewhat

77. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 77 Method -- Tess 4. Second Attitude Question I would only have sex in the context of a serious relationship. 1=Agree 2=Disagree 3=Neither strongly somewhat

78. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 78 Method -- Tess 5. Rated embarrassment I felt embarrassed answering the questions about my number of lifetime sexual partners 1=Agree 2=Disagree 3=Neither strongly somewhat

79. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 79 Method -- Tess 6. Rated truthfulness of response I was truthful in my report of my number of lifetime sexual partners 1=Agree 2=Disagree 3=Neither strongly somewhat

80. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 80 Method -- TessW 7. Rated bias of the estimate. In terms of report of my number of lifetime sexual partners, I think that: I greatly under-reported I slightly under-reported I was accurate in my report I slightly over-reported I greatly over-reported my number of lifetime sexual partners

81. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 81 Research Questions

82. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 82 Research Questions -- Tess Will the strategy difference replicate? Mode Effects: –Will web-based administration decrease the discrepancy? –Will web-based administration affect strategy selection? Will self-ratings yield self-incrimination (SI)? Will the partner discrepancy & strategy differences disappear when SIs removed?

83. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 83 Research Questions -- Tess Mode Effect: Anonymity promotes disclosure. –Discrepancy: Web < Telephone Web conventions (“flaming trolls”) condone exaggeration. –Discrepancy: Web > Telephone

84. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 84 Research Questions -- Tess Will instructions affect strategy choice? If so: –Will the instructional effect be a large one? –Will instructions effect (decreases) the discrepancy?

85. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 85 Results 1.The Sample 2.Strategy Differences 3.The Discrepancy 4.Attitudes

86. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 86 The Samples

87. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 87 Sample – TessT(elephone) Sample: n = 1641 Relevant Subset: heterosexual, sexually experienced provided: SP estimate & strategy report Retained: 87.1% Age MMDN ♂ 49.849.0727 ♀ 51.350.5702

88. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 88 Sample – TessW(eb) Sample: n = 1893 Relevant Subset: heterosexual, sexually experienced provided: SP estimate & strategy report Retained: 89.5% Age MMDN ♂ 47.146845 ♀ 48.348847

89. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 89 Classification of Respondents Sexually-experienced Heterosexuals (SeH): Tel – W 86.6% Tel – M 87.5% Web – W 90.3% Web – M 88.7%

90. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 90 Self-Incriminators Defining Self-Incriminators (SIs) –Truthfulness Response: NR, 1, 2, or 3 SIs uncommon -- % Se H –Telephone – Women 3.7% –Telephone – Men 3.7% –Web – Women 5.3% –Web – Men 6.5%

91. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 91 Tr(uth) SeH Samples Telephone Age MMDN ♂ 49.549700 ♀ 51.350676 Web Age MMDN ♂ 46.846791 ♀ 48.3248802

92. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 92 Strategy Differences

93. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 93 Strategy Selection: Sex Differences *** *

94. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 94 Strategy Selection: Mode Differences *** +

95. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 95 Relation between Strategy & SPs: Sex Differences ***

96. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 96 Relation between Strategy & SPs: Mode Differences *** *

97. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 97 Replicating the Partner Discrepancy

98. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 98 Distribution of SPs

99. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 99 Distribution of SPs

100. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 100 Mean SP Effects: Mode*** Sex*** Mode X Sex * SIs unimportant

101. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 101 Median SPs Women: Web > Tel Men: Web = Tel SIs unimportant

102. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 102 Outliers (Se Hs)

103. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 103 Mode Effects: Sex & Mode Differences

104. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 104 Mode Effect: SP ≥ 10 Effects: Sex*** Mode *** Mode X Sex*** ================= Web- ♀ almost twice as likely to indicate at least 10 SPs as Tel- ♀ For ♂s, no effect of Mode.

105. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 105 Attitudes

106. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 106 Are people more embarrassed on the phone? Mode ns Sex ns Mode X Sex ns

107. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 107 Does mode affect attitude response? Question #1: Mode *** Sex *** Mode X Sex + ============== Question #2: Mode*** Sex*** Mode X Sex +

108. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 108 TESS Summary: Strategies Multiple strategies used Sex & strategy selection: –Approximation : ♂ > ♀ –“Just Know”: ♀ > ♂ Mode Effects: –“Just Know”: Web > Tel –Other: Tel > Web

109. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 109 And Finally…

110. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 110 The Discrepancy Reduced/Eliminated in 20’s Cohort

111. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 111 TESS Summary: Strategies Estimate related to strategy –Aprox > Enum > JK SPs & Aprox: ♂ > ♀ SPs & Aprox for ♀: Web > Tel

112. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 112 TESS Summary: Mode Effects Self Incrimination: Web > Tel Attitudes: Web > Tel Embarrassment: Web = Tel Web promotes disclosure.

113. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 113 TESS Summary: SP Replicate Discrepancy Sex X Mode Interaction Consistent w/ Social Desirability Account Sex X Cohort Interaction Memory/Behavioral Differences

114. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 114 Conclusions Three-pronged Account necessary –Direct evidence for Strategy Differences Social Desirability –Sampling PSW – “conspicuous by their absence”

115. Psyco 350 Lec #17– Slide 115 Questions Why do men favor rough approximation? Memory Motivation Distributional