Assessing partial errors via analog gaming keyboards in response conflict tasks: A proof-of-concept study with the concealed information test.

The response time-based Concealed Information Test (RT-CIT) is an established memory detection paradigm. Slower RTs to critical information (called 'probes') compared to control items (called 'irrelevants') reveal recognition. Different lines of research indicate that response conflict is a strong contributor to this RT difference. Previous studies used electromyography (EMG) to measure response conflict, but this requires special equipment and trained examiners. The aim of this study was to explore if response conflict can also be measured with an analog gaming keyboard that is sensitive to minimal finger movements. In a preregistered study, participants completed an autobiographical RT-CIT (n = 35) as well as a cued recognition task (modified Sternberg task; n = 33) for validation purposes. Partial errors, partial button presses of the incorrect response key, were more frequent in trials with response conflict than in trials without conflict. Partial errors were rare (CIT: 2.9%; Sternberg: 1.7% of conflict trials), suggesting analogue keyboards have lower sensitivity than EMG. This is the first evidence that analog keyboards can measure partial errors. Although likely less sensitive than EMG measures, potential benefits of analog keyboards include their accessibility, their compatibility with all tasks that use a standard keyboard, that no physical contact with the participant is needed, and ease of data collection (e.g., allowing for group testing).

Diagnosing eyewitness identifications with reaction time-based concealed information test: the effect of observation time.

Eyewitness identification procedures rely heavily on explicit identification from lineups. Lineups have been criticized because they have a considerable error rate. We tested the potential of implicit identifications in a Concealed Information Test (CIT) as an alternative. Previous experiments have suggested that implicit identification procedures might be suited when viewing conditions were favorable. In two experiments, mock eyewitnesses (Ns = 94, 509) witnessed a videotaped mock theft with longer or shorter observation time. We derived eyewitness identifications either implicitly from CIT reaction times or explicitly from simultaneous photo lineups. In Experiment 2, we also manipulated perpetrator presence. In both experiments, the perpetrator-present CIT showed capacity to diagnose face recognition, with large effect sizes (dE1 = 0.85 [0.51; 1.18]; dE2 = 0.74 [0.52; 0.96]), as expected. Unexpectedly, no moderation by observation time was found. In line with our hypothesis, no CIT effect emerged in the perpetrator-absent condition, indicating the absence of recognition (dE2 = 0.02 [- 0.17; 0.20]). We found no compelling evidence that one method would outperform the other. This work adds to accumulating evidence that suggests that, under favorable viewing conditions and replication provided, the RT-CIT might be diagnostic of facial recognition, for example when witnesses are hesitant of making an explicit identification. Future work might investigate conditions that affect performance in one, but not the other identification method.