Skip to main content
. 2016 Jun 9;43(1):59–71. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000292

Table 1. Proportions of Correctly Recalled Targets in Cued-Recall Phase, Proportions of Intrusions in Cued Recall, Mean of FOK Judgments for Unrecalled Items, Mean Latencies to Respond Blank in Cued Recall (in Seconds), Mean Gamma Correlations Between FOK Judgments and Subsequent Recognition of Unrecalled Items, and Mean Hit Rates in a 6AFC Recognition for Unrecalled Items Presented as a Function of a Context Condition in Experiments 1 and 2.

Experiment and condition Reinstated context Re-paired context Novel context Prefamiliarized context
Note. Standard errors are given in parentheses. FOK = feeling of knowing; 6AFC = six-alternative forced-choice test.
Experiment 1
 Correct cued recall .18 (.02) .02 (.01) .09 (.01)
 Cued-recall intrusions .20 (.03) .31 (.03) .18 (.03)
 FOK judgments 38.7 (2.3) 35.4 (2.2) 30.5 (2.1)
Blank latencies 6.2 (.3) 6.0 (.4) 5.5 (.04)
 FOK resolution .13 (.08) .00 (.07) .04 (.08)
 Recognition .30 (.02) .41 (.03) .35 (.03)
Experiment 2
 Correct cued recall .19 (.02) .16 (.03) .14 (.02) .16 (.02)
 Cued-recall intrusions .10 (.02) .10 (.02) .09 (.02) .09 (.02)
 FOK judgments 43.6 (2.2) 40.1 (2.1) 36.3 (2.2) 45.0 (2.1)
Blank latencies 6.0 (.3) 5.8 (.03) 5.3 (.3) 5.9 (.3)
 FOK resolution .19 (.08) .23 (.06) .13 (.07) .18 (.07)
 Recognition .44 (.03) .42 (.03) .39 (.03) .40 (.03)