Does delaying judgments of learning really improve the efficacy of study decisions? Not so much

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 38, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 923-954

  Kimball, Daniel R ^a   Smith, Troy A ^a,b   Muntean, William J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA   (United States)

^b OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Judgments of learning; Memory monitoring; Metamemory; Self regulation of study

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; LEARNING; MEMORY; SOCIAL CONTROL; TIME;

ADULT; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; LEARNING; MEMORY; SOCIAL CONTROL, INFORMAL; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84871676298     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0026936     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Ariel, R., Dunlosky, J., & Bailey, H. (2009). Agenda-based regulation of study-time allocation: When agendas override item-based monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138, 432-447. doi: 10.1037/a0015928
2. Atkinson, R. C. (1972). Optimizing the learning of a second-language vocabulary. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 96, 124-129. doi: 10.1037/h0033475
3. Beasley, W. H., & Rodgers, J. L. (2009). Resampling methods. In R. E. Millsap & A. Maydeu-Olivares (Eds.), The Sage handbook of quantitative methods in psychology (pp. 362-386). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
4. Begg, I. M., Martin, L. A., & Needham, D. R. (1992). Memory monitoring: How useful is self-knowledge about memory? European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 4, 195-218. doi:10.1080/09541449208406182
5. Benjamin, A. S., & Diaz, M. (2008). Measurement of relative metamnemonic accuracy. In J. Dunlosky & R. A. Bjork (Eds.), Handbook of metamemory and memory (pp. 73-94). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
6. Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. (1992). A new theory of disuse and an old theory of stimulus fluctuation. In A. F. Healy, S. Kosslyn, R. M. Shiffrin, A. F. Healy, S. Kosslyn, & R. M. Shiffrin (Eds.), Essays in honor of William K. Estes. Vol. 2: From learning processes to cognitive processes (pp. 35-67). Hillsdale, NJ England: Erlbaum.
7. Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 354-380. doi:10.1037/00332909.132.3.354
8. Cepeda, N. J., Vul, E., Rohrer, D., Wixted, J. T., & Pashler, H. (2008). Spacing effects in learning: A temporal ridgeline of optimal retention. Psychological Science, 19, 1095-1102. doi:10.1111/j.14679280.2008.02209.x
9. Cheng, C.-M. (2010). Accuracy and stability of metacognitive monitoring: A new measure. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 715-732. doi:10.3758/BRM.42.3.715
10. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. Dunlosky, J., Hertzog, C., Kennedy, M. F., & Thiede, K. W. (2005). The self-monitoring approach for effective learning. Cognitive Technology, 10, 4-11.
12. Dunlosky, J., Kubat-Silman, A. K., & Hertzog, C. (2003). Training monitoring skills improves older adults' self-paced associative learning. Psychology and Aging, 18, 340-345. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.18.2.340
13. Dunlosky, J., & Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14. Dunlosky, J., & Nelson, T. O. (1992). Importance of the kind of cue for judgments of learning (JOL) and the delayed-JOL effect. Memory & Cognition, 20, 374-380. doi:10.3758/BF03210921
15. Dunlosky, J., & Nelson, T. O. (1997). Similarity between the cue for judgments of learning (JOL) and the cue for test is not the primary determinant of JOL accuracy. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 34-49. doi:10.1006/jmla.1996.2476
16. Dunlosky, J., & Thiede, K. W. (2004). Causes and constraints of the shift-to-easier-materials effect in the control of study. Memory & Cognition, 32, 779-788. doi:10.3758/BF03195868
17. Ebbinghaus, H. (1885). Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology. (H. A. Ruger & C. E. Bussenius, Trans.). New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University. (Original work published 1913)
18. Efron, B. (1992). Six questions raised by the bootstrap. In R. Lepage & L. Billard (Eds.), Exploring the limits of bootstrap (pp. 99-126). New York, NY: Wiley.
19. Jeffrey, W. E. (1961). Variables in early discrimination learning: III. Simultaneous vs. successive stimulus presentation. Child Development, 32, 305-310.
20. Kennedy, M. R. T., Carney, E., & Peters, S. M. (2003). Predictions of recall and study strategy decisions after diffuse brain injury. Brain Injury, 17, 1043-1064. doi:10.1080/0269905031000110436
21. Kimball, D. R. (2004). Consideration of memory effects in metamemory research. Paper presented at the Conference on Metacognition: Theory and Application, Barnard College, New York, NY.
22. Kimball, D. R., & Metcalfe, J. (2003). Delaying judgments of learning affects memory, not metamemory. Memory & Cognition, 31, 918-929. doi:10.3758/BF03196445
23. Koriat, A. (1997). Monitoring one's own knowledge during study: A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 349-370. doi:10.1037/00963445.126.4.349
24. Koriat, A., Ma'ayan, H., & Nussinson, R. (2006). The intricate relationships between monitoring and control in metacognition: Lessons for the cause-and-effect relation between subjective experience and behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 36-69. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.135.1.36
25. Kornell, N., & Metcalfe, J. (2006). Study efficacy and the region of proximal learning framework. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 609-622. doi:10.1037/02787393.32.3.609
26. Leonesio, R. J., & Nelson, T. O. (1990). Do different metamemory judgments tap the same underlying aspects of memory? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 464-470. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.16.3.464
27. Manly, B. F. J. (2007). Randomization, bootstrap and Monte Carlo methods in biology (3rd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
28. Masson, M. E. J., & Rotello, C. M. (2009). Sources of bias in the Goodman-Kruskal gamma coefficient measure of association: Implications for studies of metacognitive processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 509-527. doi: 10.1037/a0014876
29. Metcalfe, J. (2000). Metamemory: Theory and data. In E. Tulving, F. M. Craik, E. Tulving, & F. M. Craik (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of memory (pp. 197-211). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
30. Metcalfe, J. (2002). Is study time allocated selectively to a region of proximal learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 349-363. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.131.3.349
31. Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognitive judgments and control of study. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 159-163. doi:10.1111/j.14678721.2009.01628.x
32. Metcalfe, J., & Finn, B. (2008). Evidence that judgments of learning are causally related to study choice. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 174-179. doi:10.3758/PBR.15.1.174
33. Narens, L., Nelson, T. O., & Scheck, P. (2008). Memory monitoring and the delayed JOL effect. In J. Dunlosky & R. A. Bjork (Eds.), Handbook of metamemory and memory (pp. 137-153). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
34. Nelson, T. O. (1984). A comparison of current measures of the accuracy of feeling-of-knowing predictions. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 109-133. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.95.1.109
35. Nelson, T. O., & Dunlosky, J. (1991). When people's judgments of learning (JOLs) are extremely accurate at predicting subsequent recall: The "delayed-JOL effect." Psychological Science, 2, 267-270. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1991.tb00147.x
36. Nelson, T. O., Dunlosky, J., Graf, A., & Narens, L. (1994). Utilization of metacognitive judgments in the allocation of study during multitrial learning. Psychological Science, 5, 207-213. doi:10.1111/j.14679280.1994.tb00502.x
37. Nelson, T. O., & Leonesio, R. J. (1988). Allocation of self-paced study time and the "labor-in-vain effect." Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 676-686. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.14.4.676
38. Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 26, pp. 125-141). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
39. Nelson, T. O., Narens, L., & Dunlosky, J. (2004). A revised methodology for research on metamemory: Prejudgment recall and monitoring (PRAM). Psychological Methods, 9, 53-69. doi:10.1037/1082989X.9.1.53
40. Olejnik, S., & Algina, J. (2003). Generalized eta and omega squared statistics: Measures of effect size for some common research designs. Psychological Methods, 8, 434-447. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.8.4.434
41. Rhodes, M. G., & Tauber, S. K. (2011). The influence of delaying judgments of learning on metacognitive accuracy: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 131-148. doi:10.1037/a0021705
42. Rouder, J. N., Morey, R. D., Speckman, P. L., & Province, J. M. (2011). Bayes factors for ANOVA designs with default priors. Manuscript submitted for publication.
43. Rouder, J. N., Speckman, P. L., Sun, D., Morey, R. D., & Iverson, G. (2009). Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 225-237. doi:10.3758/PBR.16.2.225
44. Son, L. K., & Metcalfe, J. (2000). Metacognitive and control strategies in study-time allocation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 204-221. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.26.1.204
45. Spellman, B. A., & Bjork, R. A. (1992). When predictions create reality: Judgments of learning may alter what they are intended to assess. Psychological Science, 3, 315-316. doi:10.1111/j.14679280.1992.tb00680.x
46. Spellman, B. A., Bloomfield, A., & Bjork, R. A. (2008). Measuring memory and metamemory: Theoretical and statistical problems with assessing learning (in general) and using gamma (in particular) to do so. In J. Dunlosky & R. A. Bjork (Eds.), Handbook of metamemory and memory (pp. 95-114). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
47. Thiede, K. W. (1999). The importance of monitoring and self-regulation during multitrial learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 662-667. doi:10.3758/BF03212976
48. Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. M., & Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 66-73. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.66
49. Thiede, K. W., & Dunlosky, J. (1999). Toward a general model of self-regulated study: An analysis of selection of items for study and self-paced study time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 1024-1037. doi:10.1037/02787393.25.4.1024
50. Van Overschelde, J. P. (2008). Metacognition: Knowing about knowing. In J. Dunlosky & R. A. Bjork (Eds.), Handbook of metamemory and memory (pp. 47-71). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
51. Van Overschelde, J. P., & Nelson, T. O. (2006). Delayed judgments of learning cause both a decrease in absolute accuracy (calibration) and an increase in relative accuracy (resolution). Memory & Cognition, 34, 1527-1538. doi:10.3758/BF03195916
52. Zellner, A., & Siow, A. (1980). Posterior odds ratios for selected regression hypotheses. In J. M. Bernardo, M. H. DeGroot, D. V. Lindley, & A. F. M. Smith (Eds.), Bayesian statistics: Proceedings of the First International Meeting (pp. 585-603). Valencia, CA: University of Valencia Press.