Monitoring source in an unconscious plagiarism paradigm

Abstract

Current laboratory paradigms used to assess unconscious plagiarism consist of three tasks. First, participants generate solutions to a puzzle task with a partner (initial generation task); second, they recall their individual contribution (recall-own task); and third, they attempt to create new solutions that were not offered previously (generate-new task). An analysis of these tasks indicated that they differ in terms of the source monitoring they require. The two generative tasks require less differentiated information (e.g., familiarity) and relatively lax decision criteria. The recall-own task, however, demands more differentiated information and more extended decision criteria. In two experiments, factors known to influence source monitoring were manipulated. Consistent with the analysis, no effects were associated with the generative tasks. Recall-own plagiarisms increased when self- and other-generated solutions were difficult to distinguish (Experiment 1) and decreased when the two sources were easier to distinguish (Experiment 2).

References

  1. Ahrens, F. (1995, July 18). A writer’s repetitive stress:New Republic admits phrases were copied.Washington Post, pp. C1, C4.

  2. Allen, S. W., &Jacoby, L. L. (1990). Reinstating study context produces unconscious influences of memory.Memory & Cognition,18, 270–278.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brown, A. S., &Halliday, H. E. (1991). Cryptomnesia and source memory difficulties.American Journal of Psychology,104, 475–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brown, A. S., &Murphy, D. R. (1989). Cryptomnesia: Delineating inadvertent plagiarism.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,15, 432–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Dodson, C. S., &Johnson, M. K. (1996). Some problems with the process-dissociation approach to memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,125, 181–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Jacoby, L. L., &Kelley, C. M. (1987). Unconscious influences of memory for a prior event.Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin,13, 314–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Johnson, M. K., Hashtroudi, S., &Lindsay, D. S. (1993). Source monitoring.Psychological Bulletin,114, 3–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Johnson, M. K., Kounios, J., &Reeder, J. A. (1994). Time-course studies of reality monitoring and recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,20, 1409–1419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Johnson, M. K., Nolde, S. F., &De Leonardis, D. M. (1996). Emotional focus and source monitoring.Journal of Memory & Language,35, 135–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Johnson, M. K., &Raye, C. L. (1981). Reality monitoring.Psychological Review,88, 67–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Johnson, M. K., Raye, C. L., Foley, H. J., &Foley, M. A. (1981). Cognitive operations and decision bias in reality monitoring.American Journal of Psychology,94, 37–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lindsay, D. S., Johnson, M. K., &Kwon, P. (1991). Developmental changes in source monitoring.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,52, 297–318.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Marsh, R. L., &Bower, G. H. (1993). Eliciting cryptomnesia: Unconscious plagiarism in a puzzle task.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,19, 673–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Marsh, R. L., &Landau, J. D. (1995). Availability in cryptomnesia: Assessing its role in two paradigms of unconscious plagiarism.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 1568–1582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Marsh, R. L., Landau, J. D., &Hicks, J. L. (1996). How examples may (and may not) constrain creativity.Memory & Cognition,24, 669–680.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Marsh, R. L.,Landau, J. D., &Hicks, J. L. (in press). Contribution of inadequate source monitoring to unconscious plagiarism during idea generation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition.

  17. Multhaup, K. S. (1995). Aging, source, and decision criteria: When falsefame errors do and do not occur.Psychology & Aging,10, 492–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Snodgrass, J. G., Hirshman, E., &Fan, J. (1996). The sensory match effect in recognition memory: Perceptual fluency or episodic trace?Memory & Cognition,24, 367–383.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Taylor, F. K. (1965). Cryptomnesia and plagiarism.British Journal of Psychiatry,111, 1111–1118.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Zaragoza, M. S., &Lane, S. M. (1994). Source misattributions and the suggestibility of eyewitness memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,20, 934–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joshua D. Landau.

Additional information

We wish to thank Leslie Browning, Brandon Gibb, and Anne Kovach for their dedicated help in collecting the data. Appreciation is expressed to Marty Bink, Jason Hicks, and Andy Leynes for their helpful comments on an earlier draft. This work was supported by a Sigma-Xi Grants-in-Aid.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Landau, J.D., Marsh, R.L. Monitoring source in an unconscious plagiarism paradigm. Psychon Bull Rev 4, 265–270 (1997). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03209404

Download citation

Keywords

  • Generation Task
  • Source Memory
  • Initial Generation
  • Source Monitoring
  • Human Partner