Delaying students' metacognitive monitoring improves their accuracy in predicting their recognition performance.

The accuracy of students' judgments of learning (JOLs) in predicting recognition vs recall was investigated in 4 experiments. Students studied paired associates and made JOLs, which occurred either immediately after an item had been studied or shortly after an item had been studied. Students then received tests of associative recognition or paired-associate recall. JOL accuracy was greater for delayed JOLs than immediate JOLs, and the accuracy of JOLs was lower in predicting recognition than recall. The latter finding occurred (1) regardless of whether students had anticipated a recall test or a recognition test when making JOLs and (2) regardless of whether JOLs had been cued by only the stimulus of an item or by the entire stimulus-response pair. Correct guessing was shown to contribute to the lower accuracy of students' predictions of recognition. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

How Many Dimensions Underlie Judgments of Learning and Recall? Evidence From State-Trace Methodology.

The authors used state-trace methodology to investigate whether a single dimension (e.g., strength) is sufficient to account for recall and judgments of learning (JOLs) or whether multiple dimensions (e.g., intrinsic and extrinsic factors) are needed. The authors separately manipulated the independent variables of intrinsic and extrinsic cues, determining their state traces for recall and JOLs. In contrast to the supposition that intrinsic cues have similar effects on both recall and JOLs whereas extrinsic cues affect JOLs less strongly than recall (i.e., 2 dimensions underlying recall and JOLs), the authors found repeated support for the sufficiency of a single dimension for both recall and JOLs (not only immediate JOLs but also delayed JOLs) across a variety of intrinsic and extrinsic cues. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Monitoring one's own knowledge during study: A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning.

How do people monitor their knowledge during acquisition? A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning (JOLs) is outlined, distinguishing 3 types of cues for JOLs: intrinsic, extrinsic, and mnemonic. In 4 experiments using paired-associates learning, item difficulty (intrinsic) exerted similar effects of JOLs and recall. In contrast, the extrinsic factors of list repetition, item repetition within a list, and stimulus duration affected JOLs less strongly than recall, supporting the proposition that extrinsic factors are discounted in making JOLs. Although practice impaired calibration, increasing underconfidence, it did improve resolution (i.e., the recall-JOL correlation). This improvement was seen to reflect a shift in the basis of JOLs with practice, from reliance on intrinsic factors, towards greater reliance on mnemonic-based heuristics. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Judgments of learning are affected by the kind of encoding in ways that cannot be attributed to the level of recall.

The authors investigated the theoretical question of whether different kinds of encoding can affect judgments of learning (JOLs) beyond any indirect effects arising from the differences those kinds of encoding produce on the likelihood of recall. They found that JOLs were more accurate after encoding by means of intentional learning than after encoding by means of incidental learning, even when the likelihood of recall did not differ for those kinds of encoding (Experiment 1), and were more accurate when intentional encoding occurred by generating the responses than by reading the responses (Experiment 2). An aggregation effect for JOLs was also discovered: Making JOLs about the likelihood of recall for an aggregate of items yielded less overconfidence (and even underconfidence) in contrast to the typical overconfidence of item-by-item JOLs. The overall pattern of findings suggests that JOLs are theoretically rich and are based on more than whatever underlies the likelihood of recall. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Adult Age Differences in Self-Regulated Learning From Reading Sentences.

We examined age differences in the heuristic used to allocate effort in learning information from sentences. Younger and older adults read and reread sentences varying in propositional density for recall, making judgments of learning before producing recall. The allocation of effort in rereading items that were less well learned on the first reading was optimized for sentences of intermediate complexity, especially for older adults. These data support a model of self-regulated learning in which readers reduce the discrepancy between current and optimal states of learning. However, self-regulation, which may be procedure based or rely on an implicit representation of the current state of learning, may be particularly efficient for older adults within a region of proximal learning. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Encoding fluency is a cue used for judgments about learning.

The authors used paired-associate learning to investigate the hypothesis that the speed of generating an interactive image (encoding fluency) influenced 2 metacognitive judgments: judgments of learning (JOLs) and quality of encoding ratings (QUEs). Results from Experiments 1 and 2 indicated that latency of a keypress indicating successful image formation was negatively related to both JOLs and QUEs even though latency was unrelated to recall. Experiment 3 demonstrated that when concrete and abstract items were mixed in a single list, latency was related to concreteness, judgments, and recall. However, item concreteness and fluency influenced judgments independently of one another. These outcomes suggest an important role of encoding fluency in the formation of metacognitive judgments about learning and future recall. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Attributing study effort to data-driven and goal-driven effects: Implications for metacognitive judgments.

In self-paced learning, when the regulation of effort is goal driven (e.g., allocated to different items according to their relative importance), judgments of learning (JOLs) increase with study time. When it is data driven (i.e., determined by the ease of committing the item to memory), JOLs decrease with study time (Koriat, Ma’ayan, & Nussinson, 2006). Because the amount of effort invested in different items is conjointly determined by data-driven and goal-driven regulation, an attribution process must be postulated in which variations in effort are attributed by the learner to data-driven or goal-driven regulation before the implications for metacognitive judgments are determined. To support the reality of this process, the authors asked learners to adopt a facial expression that creates a feeling of effort and induced them to attribute that effort either to data-driven or to goal-driven regulation. This manipulation was found to determine the direction in which experienced effort affected metacognitive judgment. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Recollection-based prospective metamemory judgments are more accurate than those based on confidence: Judgments of remembering and knowing (JORKS).

Five experiments were conducted to examine whether the nature of the information that is monitored during prospective metamemory judgments affected the relative accuracy of those judgments. We compared item-by-item judgments of learning (JOLs), which involved participants determining how confident they were that they would remember studied items, with judgments of remembering and knowing (JORKs), which involved participants determining whether studied items would later be accompanied by contextual details (i.e., remembering) or would not (i.e., knowing). JORKs were more accurate than JOLs when remember–know or confidence judgments were made at test and when cued recall was the outcome measure, but not for yes–no recognition. We conclude that the accuracy of metamemory judgments depends on the nature of the information monitored during study and test and that metamemory monitoring can be improved if participants are asked to base their judgments on contextual details rather than on confidence. These data support the contention that metamemory decisions can be based on qualitatively distinct cues, rather than an overall memory strength signal. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Aging and monitoring associative learning: Is monitoring accuracy spared or impaired?

Mixed lists of associatively related and unrelated paired associates were used to study monitoring of associative learning. Older and younger adults produced above-chance levels of relative accuracy, as measured by intraindividual correlations (γ) of judgments of learning (JOLs) with item recall. JOLs were strongly influenced by relatedness, and this effect was greater for older adults. Relative accuracy was higher for unrelated than for related pairs. Correlations of JOLs with item recall for a randomly yoked learner indicated that access to one's own encoding experiences increased relative accuracy. Both age groups manifested a contrast effect (lower JOLs for unrelated items when mixed with related items). Aging appears to spare monitoring of encoding, even though it adversely affects associative learning. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Lack of Pervasiveness of the Underconfidence-With-Practice Effect: Boundary Conditions and an Explanation Via Anchoring.

The authors investigated whether underconfidence in judgments of learning (JOLs) is pervasive across multiple study-test trials as suggested by A. Koriat, L. Sheffer, and H. Ma'ayan (2002) or whether underconfidence with practice (UWP) might be a kind of anchoring-and-adjustment effect, such that the occurrence or nonoccurrence of the UWP effect depends on whether recall is above a psychological anchor. Participants studied normatively difficult items or normatively easy items and made immediate JOLs or delayed JOLs. The UWP effect occurred for easy items, but for difficult items an overconfidence-with-practice (OWP) effect occurred for delayed JOLs and no bias occurred for immediate JOLs. The systematic occurrence of all 3 outcomes establishes boundary conditions for the UWP effect and confirms the hypothesis that underconfidence (or the lack thereof) may arise at least in part from an anchoring-and-adjustment mechanism. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Generative processes in reading comprehension.

In M. C. Wittrock's (1974) generative model of learning with understanding, reading comprehension occurs when readers actively construct meaning for text. Two experiments were conducted with a total of 488 6th graders, in which time to learn was held constant across all treatments. It was predicted and found that the facilitation of generative processes by the insertion of paragraph headings and instructions to generate sentences about story paragraphs during encoding produced the greatest comprehension, followed in turn by instructions to generate sentences, the insertion of paragraph headings, and then by reading the same stories without generative instructions or paragraph headings. The combination of inserted paragraph headings and instructions to generate sentences about paragraphs approximately doubled comprehension and recall in each experiment. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Predicting One's Own Forgetting: The Role of Experience-Based and Theory-Based Processes.

The authors examined the hypothesis that judgments of learning (JOL), if governed by processing fluency during encoding, should be insensitive to the anticipated retention interval. Indeed, neither item-by-item nor aggregate JOLs exhibited "forgetting" unless participants were asked to estimate recall rates for several different retention intervals, in which case their estimates mimicked closely actual recall rates. These results and others reported suggest that participants can access their knowledge about forgetting but only when theory-based predictions are made, and then only when the notion of forgetting is accentuated either by manipulating retention interval within individuals or by framing recall predictions in terms of forgetting rather than remembering. The authors interpret their findings in terms of the distinction between experience-based and theory-based JOLs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Aging and recollection in the accuracy of judgments of learning.

Dual-process theories propose that episodic memory performance reflects both recollection of prior details as well as more automatic influences of the past. The authors explored the idea that recollection mediates the accuracy of judgments of learning (JOLs) and may also help explain age differences in JOL accuracy. Young and older adults made immediate JOLs at study and then completed recognition or recall tests that included a recollect/familiar judgment. JOLs were found to be strongly related to recollected items but not to items remembered on the basis of familiarity. The pattern was weaker in older adults, consistent with age-related declines in recollection. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Metamemory judgments and the benefits of repeated study: Improving recall predictions through the activation of appropriate knowledge.

Correspondence between judgments of learning (JOLs) and actual recall tends to be poor when the same items are studied and recalled multiple times (e.g., A. Koriat, L. Sheffer, & H. Ma’ayan, 2002). The authors investigated whether making relevant metamemory knowledge more salient would improve the association between actual and predicted recall as a function of repeated exposure to the same study list. In 2 experiments, participants completed 4 study–recall phases involving the same list of items. In addition to having participants make item-by-item JOLs during each study phase, after the 1st study–recall phase participants also generated change-in-recall estimates as to how many more or fewer words they would recall given another exposure to the same study list. This estimation procedure was designed to highlight repeated study as a factor that can contribute to recall performance. Activating metamemory knowledge about the benefits of repeated study for recall in this way allowed participants to accurately express this knowledge in a free-recall context (Experiment 2), but less so when the memory test was cued recall (Experiment 1). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Familiarity and retrieval processes in delayed judgments of learning.

Two processes are postulated to underlie delayed judgments of learning (JOLs)--cue familiarity and target retrievability. The two processes are distinguishable because the familiarity-based judgments are thought to be faster than the retrieval-based processes, because only retrieval-based JOLs should enhance the relative accuracy of the correlations between the JOLs and criterion test performance, and because only retrieval-based judgments should enhance memory. To test these predictions, in three experiments, the authors either speeded people's JOLs or allowed them to be unspeeded. The relative accuracy of the JOLs in predicting performance on the criterion test was higher for the unspeeded JOLs than for the speeded JOLs, as predicted. The unspeeded JOL conditions showed enhanced memory as compared with the speeded JOL conditions, as predicted. Finally, the unspeeded JOLs were sensitive to manipulations that modified recallability of the target, whereas the speeded JOLs were selectively sensitive to experimental variations in the familiarity of the cues. Thus, all three of the predictions about the consequences of the two processes potentially underlying delayed JOLs were borne out. A model of the processes underlying delayed JOLs based on these and earlier results is presented. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The interplay between value and relatedness as bases for metacognitive monitoring and control: Evidence for agenda-based monitoring.

Two experiments are reported examining how value and relatedness interact to influence metacognitive monitoring and control processes. Participants studied unrelated and related word pairs, each accompanied by point values denoting how important the items were to remember. These values were presented either before or after each pair in a between-subjects design, and participants made item-by-item judgments of learning (JOLs) predicting the likelihood that each item would be remembered later. Results from Experiment 1 showed that participants used value and relatedness as cues to inform their JOLs. Interestingly, JOLs increased as a function of value even in the after condition in which value had no impact on cued recall. Participants in Experiment 2 were permitted to control study time for each item. Results showed that value and relatedness were simultaneously considered when allocating study time. These results support a cue-weighting process in which JOLs and study time allocation are based on multiple cues, which may or may not be predictive of future memory performance, and complements the agenda-based regulation model of study time (Ariel, Dunlosky, & Bailey, 2009) by providing evidence for agenda-based monitoring. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Comparison of monitoring during study and during testing on a sentence-learning task.

Adults' ability to monitor their learning and memory of sentences was investigated. Subjects read eight sentences containing within-sentence elaborations that clarified the significance of subject–verb–object relations in the sentences (precisely elaborated) and eight with elaborations that did not (imprecisely elaborated). Participants estimated their recall for each type of sentence (a) before studying the sentences, (b) after studying but before being tested on the sentences, or (c) after being tested. The precise sentences were recalled significantly better; however, only the subjects who estimated after the test accurately perceived this recall difference. Subsequent interviews showed that most subjects became aware during the study trial of differences in sentence difficulty and used this information to allocate more time and effort to the imprecise sentences. Subjects can apparently monitor the relative difficulty of items while processing them and, on that basis, attempt to regulate their study activity accordingly. However, they do not gain information concerning the memorial consequences of their study behavior until they are tested on the material. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Unintended effects of goals on unintended inferences.

Three studies, with a total of 290 undergraduates, investigated unintended effects of goals on spontaneous trait inferences (STIs). Ss read trait-implying sentences to memorize them, to analyze sentence features, or to make social judgments. Cued recall revealed unintended (spontaneous) trait and behavioral-gist inferences. They were equally frequent with all the social judgment goals and absent or infrequent with feature analysis goals. Memorizing the sentences while ignoring their meaning reduced, but did not eliminate, STIs. Goals also affected whether traits were linked directly to actors in explicit memory. Social inferences can occur without intentions or awareness, even when meanings are intentionally ignored, as incidental results of analyzing stimulus details, and as intermediate but unnoticed results of other social judgments. Goals affect these inference likelihoods. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A Revised Methodology for Research on Metamemory: Pre-judgment Recall And Monitoring (PRAM).

A revised methodology is described for research on metacognitive monitoring, especially judgments of learning (JOLs), to investigate psychological processing that previously has been only hypothetical and unobservable. During data collection a new stage of recall occurs just prior to the JOL, so that during data analysis the items can be partitioned into subcategories to measure the degree of JOL accuracy in ways that are more analytic than was previously possible. A weighted-average combinatorial rule allows the component measures of JOL accuracy to be combined into the usual overall measure of metacognitive accuracy. An example using the revised methodology offers a new explanation for the delayed-JOL effect, in which delayed JOLs are more accurate than immediate JOLs for predicting recall. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Response latencies in auditory sentence comprehension: Effects of linguistic versus perceptual challenge.

Older adults with good hearing and with mild-to-moderate hearing loss were tested for comprehension of spoken sentences that required perceptual effort (hearing speech at lower sound levels), and two degrees of cognitive load (sentences with simpler or more complex syntax). Although comprehension accuracy was equivalent for both participant groups and for young adults with good hearing, hearing loss was associated with longer response latencies to the correct comprehension judgments, especially for complex sentences heard at relatively low amplitudes. These findings demonstrate the need to take into account both sensory and cognitive demands of speech materials in older adults' language comprehension. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)