Abstract
To further the understanding of the mechanisms of strategy choice, in three experiments, we investigate the role of explicit awareness and working memory in strategy adaptivity. Experiment 1 provided correlational evidence that individual differences in strategy adaptivity to changing base rates are related to individual differences in awareness of those changes but appear not to be related to individual differences in working memory capacity. Experiment 2 replicated the role of awareness, and the results suggest that awareness at the time of the base-rate change, rather than afterwards, is related to increased strategy adaptivity. Experiment 3 measured working memory capacity using a different procedure and manipulated working memory load with a dual-task procedure; again, no apparent role of working memory capacity in strategy adaptivity was found. This juxtaposition of findings presents a challenge for existing models of strategy choice.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Anderson, J. R., &Lebiere, C. (1998).Atomic components of thought. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Carpenter, P. A., Just, M. A., &Shell, P. (1990). What one intelligence test measures: A theoretical account of the processing in the Raven Progressive Matrices Test.Psychological Review,97, 404–431.
Clark, R. E., &Squire, L. R. (1998). Classical conditioning and brain systems: The role of awareness.Science,280, 77–81.
Clark, R. E., &Squire, L. R. (1999). Human eyeblink classical conditioning: Effects of manipulating awareness of the stimulus contingencies.Psychological Science,10, 14–18.
Daily, L. Z., Lovett, M. C., & Reder, L. M. (in press). Modeling individual differences in working memory performance: A source activation account.Cognitive Science.
Daneman, M., &Carpenter, P. A. (1980). Individual differences in working memory.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,19, 450–466.
Davidson, J. E., Deuser, R., &Sternberg, R. J. (1994). The role of metacognition in problem solving. In J. Metcalfe & A. P. Shimamura (Ed.),Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 207–226). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Ericsson, K. A., &Simon, H. A. (1993).Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Estes, W. K. (1956). The problem of inference from curves based on group data.Psychological Bulletin,53, 134–140.
Hartman, M., Knopman, D. S., &Nissen, M. J. (1989). Implicit learning of new verbal associations.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,15, 1070–1082.
Just, M.A., &Carpenter, P. A. (1992). A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory.Psychological Review,99, 122–149.
Koriat, A. (1993). How do we know that we know? The accessibility model of the feeling of knowing.Psychological Review,100, 609–639.
Kyllonen, P. C. (1993). Aptitude testing inspired by information processing: A test of the four-sources model.Journal of General Psychology,120, 375–405.
Kyllonen, P. C. (1994). Cognitive abilities testing: An agenda for the 1990s. In M. G. Rumsey, C. B. Walker, & J. H. Harris (Eds.),Personnel selection and classification (pp. 103–129). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kyllonen, P. C. (1995). CAM: A theoretical framework for cognitive abilities measurement. In D. Detterman (Ed.),Current topics in human intelligence: Volume IV. Theories of intelligence (pp. 307–359). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
LaBar, K. S., &Disterhoft, J. F. (1998). Conditioning, awareness, and the hippocampus.Hippocampus,8, 620–626.
Lemaire, P., &Reder, L. (1999). What affects strategy selection in arithmetic? The example of parity and five effects on product verification.Memory & Cognition,27, 364–382.
Lovett, M. C., &Anderson, J. R. (1996). History of success and current context in problem solving: Combined influences on operator selection.Cognitive Psychology,31, 168–217.
Lovett, M. C., Daily, L. Z., &Reder, L.M. (2000). A source activation theory of working memory: Cross-task prediction of performance in ACT-R.Cognitive Systems Research,1, 99–118.
Lovett, M. C., Reder, L. M., &Lebiere, C. (1999). Modeling working memory in a unified architecture: The ACT-R perspective. In A. Miyake & P. Shah (Eds.),Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control (pp. 135–182). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lovett, M.C., &Schunn, C.D. (1999). Task representations, strategy variability and base-rate neglect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,128, 107–130.
Luchins, A. S., &Luchins, E. H. (1950). New experimental attempts at preventing mechanization in problem solving.Journal of General Psychology,42, 279–297.
Maddox, W. T. (1999). On the dangers of averaging across observers when comparing decision bound models and generalized context models of categorization.Perception & Psychophysics,61, 354–374.
Metcalfe, J. (1994). A computational modeling approach to novelty monitoring, metacognition, and frontal lobe dysfunction. In J. Metcalfe & A. P. Shimamura (Eds.),Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 137–156). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Nelson, T. O., &Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and some new findings. In A. C. Graesser & G. H. Bower (Eds.),The psychology of learning and motivation: Inferences and text comprehension (Vol.25, pp. 125–173). New York: Academic Press.
Nelson, T. O., &Narens, L. (1994). Why investigate metacognition? In J. Metcalfe & A. P. Shimamura (Ed.),Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 1–25). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Nissen, M. J., &Bullemer, P. (1987). Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures.Cognitive Psychology,19, 1–32.
Raven, J. C., Court, J. H., &Raven, J. (1977).Standard progressive matrices. London: H. K. Lewis.
Reder, L. M. (1982). Plausibility judgments versus fact retrieval: Alternative strategies for sentence verification.Psychological Review,89, 250–280.
Reder, L.M. (1987). Strategy selection in question answering.Cognitive Psychology,19, 90–137.
Reder, L. M. (1988). Strategic control of retrieval strategies. In G. H. Bower (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 22, pp. 227–259). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Reder, L.M., &Schunn, C. D. (1996). Metacognition does not imply awareness: Strategy choice is governed by implicit learning and memory. In L. M. Reder (Ed.),Implicit memory and metacognition (pp. 45–78). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Reder, L.M., &Schunn, C. D. (1999). Bringing together the psychometric and strategy worlds: Predicting adaptivity in a dynamic task. In D. Gopher & A. Koriat (Eds.),Attention and performance XVII: Cognitive regulation of performance. Interaction of theory and application (pp. 315–342). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Schunn, C. D., &Reder, L. M. (1998). Strategy adaptivity and individual differences. In D. L. Medin (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 38, pp. 115–154). New York: Academic Press.
Schunn, C. D., & Reder, L.M. (in press). Another source of individual differences: Strategy adaptivity to changing rates of success.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.
Shah, P., &Carpenter, P. A. (1995). Conceptual limitations in comprehending line graphs.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,124, 43–61.
Siegler, R. S. (1987). The perils of averaging data over strategies: An example from children's addition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,116, 250–264.
Siegler, R. S. (1996).Emerging minds: The process of change in children's thinking. New York: Oxford University Press.
Siegler, R. S., &Shipley, C. (1995). Variation, selection, and cognitive change. In G. Halford & T. Simon (Eds.),Developing cognitive competence: New approaches to process modeling (pp. 31–76). New York: Academic Press.
Siegler, R. S., &Shrager, J. (1984). Strategy choices in addition and subtraction: How do children know what to do? In C. Sophian (Ed.),Origins of cognitive skills (pp. 229–293). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Spehn, M. K., &Reder, L. M. (2000). The unconscious feeling of knowing: A commentary on Koriat's paper.Consciousness & Cognition,9, 187–192.
Thorndike, E. L. (1913).Educational psychology: The psychology of learning (Vol. 2). New York: Columbia University, Teachers College.
Turner, M. L., &Engle, R. W. (1989). Is working memory capacity task dependent?Journal of Memory & Language,28, 127–154.
Yuill, N., Oakhill, J., &Parkin, A. (1989). Working memory, comprehension ability, and the resolution of text anomaly.British Journal of Psychology,80, 351–361.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Additional information
This work was supported by Grant N00014-95-1-0223 to L.M.R. from the Office of Naval Research through Helen Gigley. A preliminary form of Experiment 1 is reported in Schunn and Reder (1998).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schunn, C.D., Lovett, M.C. & Reder, L.M. Awareness and working memory in strategy adaptivity. Memory & Cognition 29, 254–266 (2001). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194919
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194919