Episodic Memory
Recency Judgment Task
Also called: Relative recency judgment, temporal order memory, recency discrimination
Measure memory for order by asking which of two studied patterns appeared later.
4-6 minUntimed
Free to start: 10 free participants per account, then $0.99 per participant for academic research, or any yearly plan. Try it here first, with no account.
- Papers, 2021 to 2025
- 8
- Evidence grade
- D
- Registered clinical studies
- 0
Which appeared later?
Left
Right
What it measures
Measures memory for temporal order. After studying patterns one at a time, participants choose which of two appeared later. Accuracy is reported for nearby and widely separated list positions.
Constructs
- Temporal order memory
- Recency discrimination
- Visual episodic memory
Research uses
- Temporal memory research
- Aging research
- Visual memory research
How the paradigm works
Recency judgment asks which of two studied items occurred later. Both items are familiar, so recognizing an item is insufficient: the answer depends on their order. This task studies lists of 12 original visual patterns and tests six pairs after each list. Each item appears in only one pair, preventing earlier test pairs from rehearsing later ones.
More about the paradigm
There are six scored lists by default (four to twelve), preceded by one practice list. Each pattern appears for 1,500 ms with a 500 ms gap; a 3,000 ms retention interval follows the list. Half of the pairs are one list position apart and half five positions apart. Correct sides are balanced within each list. Responses have no deadline.
The primary score is recency accuracy. Near and far accuracy and their difference show the effect of temporal separation. Response time is descriptive. Responses under 100 ms are excluded and counted as anticipations. This version uses shorter lists, an unfilled delay, original patterns and later-item judgments, rather than the source’s object photographs, filled delay and earlier-item judgments. Use the near and far accuracy scores to compare how temporal separation affects memory for order.
Scores
- Recency accuracy%
- Share of usable pairs in which the later item was chosen.
- Informational
- Nearby pair accuracy%
- Accuracy for study positions one apart.
- Informational
- Separated pair accuracy%
- Accuracy for study positions five apart.
- Informational
- Temporal distance effect%
- Far accuracy minus near accuracy.
- Informational
- Correct response timems
- Median correct response time, descriptive rather than the primary score.
- Informational
- Anticipationscount
- Choices under 100 ms, excluded from accuracy and response time.
- Informational
- Completed pairstrials
- Pairs in the selected run.
- Informational
Use and evidence
8 papers from 2021 to 2025 name this task in their title or abstract, down 64% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 462 of 495 test families in our census. See the counts for every test.
Show the numbers
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 2 |
| 2024 | 2 |
| 2023 | 1 |
| 2022 | 2 |
| 2021 | 1 |
| 2020 | 5 |
| 2019 | 3 |
| 2018 | 5 |
| 2017 | 6 |
| 2016 | 3 |
| 2015 | 0 |
| 2014 | 7 |
| 2013 | 7 |
| 2012 | 3 |
| 2011 | 2 |
| 2010 | 5 |
| 2009 | 8 |
| 2008 | 2 |
| 2007 | 3 |
| 2006 | 1 |
| 2005 | 3 |
| 2004 | 10 |
| 2003 | 3 |
| 2002 | 3 |
| 2001 | 3 |
| 2000 | 4 |
Use grade E
Fewer than 30 papers from 2021 to 2025.
Evidence grade D
Little published measurement evidence found.
- Papers on test-retest reliability
- 0
- Papers on reliability or validity
- 1
- Registered clinical studies using it as an outcome
- 0
Note on the counts: Original visual patterns and short lists; paired later-item judgments, no published norms..
How the grades work
Use: A is 1,000 or more papers from 2021 to 2025, B 300 to 999, C 100 to 299, D 30 to 99 and E fewer than 30. Evidence: A means at least 25 papers report its test-retest reliability and at least 25 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome; B, at least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers; C, at least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies; D, little published measurement evidence found. The counts measure use. They include every paper that names the task in its title or abstract. Grades describe the published research on this task, not ConductCognition's version of it.
Source: ConductCognition test census 0.22.0, counted 2 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Task design
The trial sequence as the test runs in ConductCognition.
- Lists
- 6 scored lists as standard (4 to 12), with 12 original patterns and 6 test pairs per list. Each pattern is tested once.
- Study timing
- Each pattern appears for 1,500 ms, followed by a 500 ms cross. A 3,000 ms unfilled delay follows each list.
- Pairs
- 3 pairs one position apart and 3 pairs five positions apart per list. Each list has 3 correct left and 3 correct right answers.
- Response
- Choose Left or Right without a time limit. Desktops, tablets and phones are supported.
- Practice
- 1 separate list of 12 patterns and 6 pairs with feedback.
- Scores
- Recency accuracy, near and far accuracy, far-minus-near accuracy, correct response time and anticipations under 100 ms.
Compare memory for the order of nearby and widely separated study items. Both choices were studied, so the answer depends on their order. Original patterns, shorter lists and an unfilled delay adapt the source procedure to later-item judgments.
Quality checks
Each session is marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason, before you see its scores.
Scored rows: recency_judgment_test from the longest run. Which of two studied patterns appeared later, with no deadline and chance 50%. Below-chance accuracy invalidates; accuracy not above chance is flagged. One side on 90% of answers invalidates when accuracy is not above chance. Answers under 200 ms on at least half of answered pairs invalidate. Incomplete runs are flagged. A hidden tab withholds the percentile.
Why these rules
Both choices appeared during study, so item recognition alone cannot give the answer. Guessing gives 50%. Very fast repeated choices can reflect clicking through. Fixed study periods need an uninterrupted visible screen.
No percentile. Scores and quality flags only.
Running this test
Settings you can change
| Setting | Standard | Allowed |
|---|---|---|
| Study lists | 6 | 4 to 12 |
Yearly plans can change settings within these limits. Free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Need a setting this test does not have?
Devices and languages
- Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. Participant devices
- Languages: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese.
- Available on: Every plan, including the free plan.
- No percentile. Scores and quality flags only. How norms work
- Recruiting online? See the setup guides for Prolific, Sona Systems, CloudResearch Connect and Qualtrics.
Cite and describe
Participants completed the Recency Judgment Task in a web browser (ConductCognition task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0; Jenkins and Ranganath, 2016), with the standard settings (study lists: 6). The main score was recency accuracy (share of usable pairs in which the later item was chosen).
ConductCognition versions: task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0. Every export records the versions each session used, for a methods section.
- Jenkins, L. J., & Ranganath, C. (2016). Distinct neural mechanisms for remembering when an event occurred. Hippocampus, 26(5), 554-559. https://doi.org/10.1002/hipo.22571Study lists followed by paired temporal-order judgments; an original short-list visual adaptation.
Source papers
- Jenkins, L. J., & Ranganath, C. (2016). Distinct neural mechanisms for remembering when an event occurred. Hippocampus, 26(5), 554-559.Paradigm source
Questions
How long does the Recency Judgment Task take?
About 4 to 6 minutes, as listed in the test library.
What device does a participant need?
Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. The browser must be Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
What scores does it produce?
Recency accuracy, Nearby pair accuracy, Separated pair accuracy, Temporal distance effect, Correct response time, Anticipations and Completed pairs. Each session is also marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason.
How widely is the Recency Judgment Task used in research?
8 papers from 2021 to 2025 name it in their title or abstract, down 64% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 462 of 495 test families in the ConductCognition test census (use grade E). Source: ConductCognition test census 0.22.0, counted 2 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
How much reliability evidence does the Recency Judgment Task have?
In the published research, 0 papers report its test-retest reliability and 0 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome (evidence grade D in the ConductCognition test census).
Does it report a percentile?
No. Scores and quality flags only.
Which settings can a researcher change?
Study lists (4 to 12). Settings can be changed on yearly plans; free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Which languages can participants use?
Participants can take this test in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese. English is on every plan, and the other languages come with yearly plans. Have a native speaker read the machine-translated text before launch.
Is this a clinical test?
No. ConductCognition is for research use only. It runs, scores and exports the test; clinical interpretation is outside the platform.
Every test: the full test list.
Run this test in your next study
Start free with 10 free participants on any test, then use participant credits or a yearly plan.