Bridgid Finn

Evidence that judgments of learning are causally related to study choice

Three experiments investigated whether study choice was directly related to judgments of learning (JOLs) by examining people’s choices in cases in which JOLs were dissociated from recall. In Experiment 1, items were given either three repetitions or one repetition on Trial 1. Items given three repetitions received one on Trial 2, and those given one repetition received three on Trial 2—equating performance at the end of Trial 2, but yielding different immediate Trial 2 JOLs. Study choice followed the “illusory” JOLs. A delayed JOL condition in Experiment 2 did not show this JOL bias and neither did study choice. Finally, using a paradigm (Koriat & Bjork, 2005) in which similar JOLs are given to forward and backward associative pairs, despite much worse performance on the backward pairs, study choice again followed the mistaken JOLs. We concluded that JOLs—what people believe they know—directly influence people’s study choices.

Enhancing Retention Through Reconsolidation: Negative Emotional Arousal Following Retrieval Enhances Later Recall

When information is retrieved from memory, it enters a labile state rendering it amenable to change. This process of reconsolidation may explain, in part, the benefits that are observed in later retention following retrieval of information on an initial test. We examined whether the benefits of retrieval could be modulated by an emotional event occurring after retrieval. Participants studied Swahili-English vocabulary pairs. On a subsequent cued-recall test, each retrieval was followed by a blank screen, a neutral picture, or a picture inducing negative affect. Performance on a final cued-recall test was best for items whose initial retrieval was followed by negative pictures. This outcome occurred when a negative picture was presented immediately after (Experiment 1) or 2 s after (Experiment 2) successful retrieval, but not when it was presented after restudy of the vocabulary pair (Experiment 3). Postretrieval reconsolidation via emotional processing may enhance the usual positive effects of retrieval.

Framing effects on metacognitive monitoring and control.

Three experiments explored the contribution of framing effects on metamemory judgments. In Experiment 1, participants studied word pairs. After each presentation, they made an immediate judgment of learning (JOL), framed in terms of either remembering or forgetting. In the remember frame, participants made judgments about how likely it was that they would remember each pair on the upcoming test. In the forget frame, participants made judgments about how likely it was that they would forget each pair. Confidence differed as a result of the frame. Forget frame JOLs, equated to the remember frame JOL scale by a 1-judgment conversion, were lower and demonstrated a smaller overconfidence bias than did remember frame JOLs. When judgments were made at a delay, framing effects did not occur. In Experiment 2, people chose to restudy more items when choices were made within a forget frame. In Experiment 3, people studied Spanish—English vocabulary pairs ranging in difficulty. The framing effect was replicated with judgments and choices. Moreover, forget frame participants included more easy and medium items to restudy. These results demonstrated the important consequences of framing effects on assessment and control of study.

Delayed versus immediate feedback in children's and adults' vocabulary learning

We investigated whether the superior memory performance sometimes seen with delayed rather than immediate feedback was attributable to the shorter retention interval (orlag to test) from the last presentation of the correct information in the delayed condition. Whetherlag to test was controlled or not, delayed feedback produced better final test performance than did immediate feedback, which in turn produced better performance than did no feedback at all, when we tested Grade 6 children learning school-relevant vocabulary. With college students learning GRE-level words, however, delayed feedback produced better performance than did immediate feedback (and both were better than no feedback) when lag to test was uncontrolled, but there was no difference between the delayed and immediate feedback conditions when the lag to test was controlled.

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 peoples 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.

Does Easily Learned Mean Easily Remembered? It Depends on Your Beliefs About Intelligence

Because numerous studies have shown that feelings of encoding fluency are positively correlated with judgments of learning, a single dominant heuristic, easily learned = easily remembered (ELER), has been posited to explain how people interpret encoding fluency when assessing their own memory. However, the inferences people draw from feelings of encoding fluency may vary with their beliefs about why information is easy or effortful to encode. We conducted two experiments in which participants studied word lists and then predicted their future recall of those items. Results revealed that subjects who viewed intelligence as fixed, and who tended to interpret effortful encoding as indicating that they had reached the limits of their ability, used the ELER heuristic to make judgments of learning. However, subjects who viewed intelligence as malleable, and who tended to interpret effortful encoding as indicating greater engagement in learning, did not use the ELER heuristic and at times predicted greater memory for items that they found more effortful to learn.

Scaffolding feedback to maximize long-term error correction

Scaffolded feedback was tested against three other feedback presentation methods (standard corrective feedback, minimal feedback, and answer-until-correct multiple-choice feedback) over both short- and long-term retention intervals in order to assess which method would produce the most robust gains in error correction. Scaffolded feedback was a method designed to take advantage of the benefits of retrieval practice by providing incremental hints until the correct answer could be self-generated. In Experiments 1 and 3, on an immediate test, final memory for the correct answer was lowest for questions given minimal feedback, moderate for the answer-until-correct condition, and equally high in the scaffolded feedback condition and the standard feedback condition. However, tests of the maintenance of the corrections over a 30-min delay (Experiment 2) and over a 1-day delay (Experiment 3) demonstrated that scaffolded feedback gave rise to the best memory for the correct answers at a delay.

Metacognitive judgments of repetition and variability effects in natural concept learning: evidence for variability neglect.

In four experiments, we examined the effects of repetitions and variability on the learning of bird families and metacognitive awareness of such effects. Of particular interest was the accuracy of, and bases for, predictions regarding classification of novel bird species, referred to as category learning judgments (CLJs). Participants studied birds in high repetitions and high variability conditions. These conditions differed in the number of presentations of each bird (repetitions) and the number of unique species from each family (variability). After study, participants made CLJs for each family and were then tested. Results from a classification test revealed repetition benefits for studied species and variability benefits for novel species. In contrast with performance, CLJs did not reflect the benefits of variability. Results showed that CLJs were susceptible to accessibility-based metacognitive illusions produced by additional repetitions of studied items.

ENDING ON A HIGH NOTE: Adding a Better End to Effortful Study

Remembered utility is the retrospective evaluation about the pleasure and pain associated with a past experience. It has been shown to influence prospective choices about whether to repeat or to avoid similar situations in the future (D. Kahneman 2000; D. Kahneman, D. L. Fredrickson, C. A. Schreiber, & D. A. Redelmeier, 1993). Evaluations about our hedonic past often disregard the duration of the experience and are influenced more by the peak and the final levels of discomfort (B. L. Fredrickson & D. Kahneman, 1993). Two experiments explored the remembered discomfort of an effortful learning experience and the influence of this evaluation on prospective study choices. The design of the studies mimicked D. Kahneman et al.s (1993) cold-pressor study, but used an exceptionally challenging learning experience in place of the painful experience of submerging ones hand in ice water. An extremely effortful study episode extended by a more moderate interval was preferred to a shorter, unextended interval, despite better test performance following the shorter interval. Future study choices reflected this preference. These findings suggest that the act of acquiring knowledge has value in the learning process.

Interfering effects of retrieval in learning new information.

In 7 experiments, we explored the role of retrieval in associative updating, that is, in incorporating new information into an associative memory. We tested the hypothesis that retrieval would facilitate incorporating a new contextual detail into a learned association. Participants learned 3 pieces of information-a persons face, name, and profession (in Experiments 1-5). In the 1st phase, participants in all conditions learned faces and names. In the 2nd phase, participants either restudied the face-name pair (the restudy condition) or were given the face and asked to retrieve the name (the test condition). In the 3rd phase, professions were presented for study just after restudy or testing. Our prediction was that the new information (the profession) would be more readily learned following retrieval of the face-name association compared to restudy of the face-name association. However, we found that the act of retrieval generally undermined acquisition of new associations rather than facilitating them. This detrimental effect emerged on both immediate and delayed tests. Further, the effect was not due to selective attention to feedback because we found impairment whether or not feedback was provided after the Phase 2 test. The data are novel in showing that the act of retrieving information can inhibit the ability to learn new information shortly thereafter. The results are difficult to accommodate within current theories that mostly emphasize benefits of retrieval for learning.