Skip to Main Content
Table 1. 

Mean Behavioral Performance and Response Time (SD) by Confidence Levela


High Confidence Hits
Low Confidence Hits
Misses
Proportion
RT
Proportion
RT
Proportion
RT
Face–Face .42 (.13) 1415 (186) .27 (.12) 1848 (306) .31 (.12) 1796 (250) 
Face/Scene–Face .35 (.14) 1478 (177) .28 (.11) 1820 (283) .37 (.13) 1824 (270) 

 

 
High Confidence
 
Low Confidence
 

 

 
Proportion
 
RT
 
Proportion
 
RT
 

 

 
False Alarms 0.08 (0.10) 1650 (656) 0.21 (.09) 1754 (285) 

High Confidence Hits
Low Confidence Hits
Misses
Proportion
RT
Proportion
RT
Proportion
RT
Face–Face .42 (.13) 1415 (186) .27 (.12) 1848 (306) .31 (.12) 1796 (250) 
Face/Scene–Face .35 (.14) 1478 (177) .28 (.11) 1820 (283) .37 (.13) 1824 (270) 

 

 
High Confidence
 
Low Confidence
 

 

 
Proportion
 
RT
 
Proportion
 
RT
 

 

 
False Alarms 0.08 (0.10) 1650 (656) 0.21 (.09) 1754 (285) 

aIn another condition in which the face–scene pair was identical at study and test (FS-Intact), hit rates were higher than the F–F condition (0.75 vs. 0.69). Therefore, the current calculation of the context effect, because we are using the F–F condition that had lower performance, is a conservative estimate.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal