Accurate measurement of cognitive strategies is important in diverse areas of psychological research. Strategy self-reports are a common measure, but C. Thevenot, M. Fanget, and M. Fayol (2007) proposed a more objective method to distinguish different strategies in the context of mental arithmetic. In their operand recognition paradigm, speed of recognition memory for problem operands after solving a problem indexes strategy (e.g., direct memory retrieval vs. a procedural strategy). Here, in 2 experiments, operand recognition time was the same following simple addition or multiplication, but, consistent with a wide variety of previous research, strategy reports indicated much greater use of procedures (e.g., counting) for addition than multiplication. Operation, problem size (e.g., 2 + 3 vs. 8 + 9), and operand format (digits vs. words) had interactive effects on reported procedure use that were not reflected in recognition performance. Regression analyses suggested that recognition time was influenced at least as much by the relative difficulty of the preceding problem as by the strategy used. The findings indicate that the operand recognition paradigm is not a reliable substitute for strategy reports and highlight the potential impact of difficulty-related carryover effects in sequential cognitive tasks. (Contains 2 figures, 7 tables and 3 footnotes.)