When disfluency is-and is not-a desirable difficulty: The influence of typeface clarity on metacognitive judgments and memory

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 41, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 229-241

  Yue, Carole L ^a   Castel, Alan D ^a   Bjork, Robert A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Desirable difficulties; Fluency; Judgments of learning; Memory; Metamemory

Indexed keywords

ADULT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEARNING; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHYSIOLOGY; RECALL; RECOGNITION; TIME FACTOR; YOUNG ADULT; ARTICLE; TIME;

ADULT; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; LEARNING; MALE; MENTAL RECALL; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); TIME FACTORS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84873250385     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: 15325946     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13421-012-0255-8     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Alter, A. L., Oppenheimer, D. M., Epley, N., & Eyre, R. N. (2007). Overcoming intuition: Metacognitive difficulty activates analytic reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 136, 569-576.
2. Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In K. W. Spence & J. T. Spence (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 2, pp. 89-195). New York, NY: Academic Press.
3. Baddeley, A. (1981). The concept of working memory: A view of its current state and probable future development. Cognition, 10, 17-23. doi: 10. 1016/0010-0277(81)90020-2.
4. Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Cortese, M. J., Hutchison, K. A., Kessler, B., Loftis, B., Treiman, R. (2007). The English Lexicon Project. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 445-459. doi: 10. 3758/BF03193014.
5. Begg, I., Duft, S., Lalonde, P., Melnick, R., & Sanvito, J. (1989). Memory predictions are based on ease of processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 610-632.
6. Benjamin, A. S., Bjork, R. A., & Schwartz, B. L. (1998). The mismeasure of memory: When retrieval fluency is misleading as a metamnemonic index. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 127, 55-68. doi: 10. 1037/0096-3445. 127. 1. 55.
7. Bjork, R. A. (1994). Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. In J. Metcalfe & A. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 185-205). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8. Castel, A. D. (2008). Metacognition and learning about primacy and recency effects in free recall: The utilization of intrinsic and extrinsic cues when making judgments of learning. Memory & Cognition, 36, 429-437. doi: 10. 3758/MC. 36. 2. 429.
9. Castel, A. D., Rhodes, M. G., McCabe, D. P., Soderstrom, N. C., & Loaiza, V. M. (2012). The fate of being forgotten: Forgotten information is judged as less important. Manuscript under revision.
10. deWinstanley, P. A., & Bjork, E. L. (2004). Processing strategies and the generation effect: Implications for making a better reader. Memory & Cognition, 32, 945-955. doi: 10. 3758/BF03196872.
11. Diemand-Yauman, C., Oppenheimer, D. M., & Vaughan, E. B. (2010). Fortune favors the bold (and the italicized): Effects of disfluency on educational outcomes. Cognition, 118, 111-115.
12. Dougherty, M. R., Scheck, P., Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (2005). Using the past to predict the future. Memory & Cognition, 33, 1096-1115.
13. Glass, J. M. (2007). Visual function and cognitive aging: Differential role of contrast sensitivity in verbal versus spatial tasks. Psychology and Aging, 22, 233-238.
14. Glenberg, A. M. (1976). Monotonic and nonmonotonic lag effects in paired-associate and recognition memory paradigms. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 1-16.
15. Guenther, R. K. (2012). Does the processing fluency of a syllabus affect the forecasted grade and course difficulty? Psychological Reports, 110, 1-9.
16. Hirshman, E., & Mulligan, N. (1991). Perceptual interference improves explicit memory but does not enhance data-driven processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 507-513.
17. Hirshman, E., Trembath, D., & Mulligan, N. (1994). Theoretical implications of the mnemonic benefits of perceptual interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 608-620.
18. Jacoby, L. L. (1978). On interpreting the effects of repetition: Solving a problem versus remembering a solution. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 649-667. doi: 10. 1016/S0022-5371(78)90393-6.
19. 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. 1037/0096-3445. 126. 4. 349.
20. Lindenberger, U., Scherer, H., & Baltes, P. B. (2001). The strong connection between sensory and cognitive performance in old age: Not due to sensory acuity reductions operating during cognitive assessment. Psychology and Aging, 16, 196-205.
21. Maki, R. H., Foley, J. M., Kajer, W. K., Thompson, R. C., & Willert, M. G. (1990). Increased processing enhances calibration of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 609-616.
22. Mulligan, N. (1996). The effects of perceptual interference at encoding on implicit memory, explicit memory, and memory for source. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1067-1087.
23. Nairne, J. S. (1988). The mnemonic value of perceptual identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 248-255. doi: 10. 1037/0278-7393. 14. 2. 248.
24. Naveh-Benjamin, M., & Kilb, A. (2012). How the measurement of memory processes can affect memory performance: The case of remember/know judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 194-203.
25. Nelson, T. O. (1984). A comparison of current measures of the accuracy of feeling-of-knowing predictions. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 109-133.
26. Oppenheimer, D. M., & Frank, M. C. (2008). A rose in any other font wouldn't smell as sweet: Effects of perceptual fluency on categorization. Cognition, 106, 1178-1194.
27. Plourde, C. E., & Besner, D. (1997). On the locus of the word frequency effect in visual word recognition. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51, 181-194.
28. Rawson, K. A., & Dunlosky, J. (2002). Are performance predictions for text based on ease of processing? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 69-80.
29. Rhodes, M. G., & Castel, A. D. (2008). Memory predictions are influenced by perceptual information: Evidence for metacognitive illusions. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 137, 615-625. doi: 10. 1037/a0013684.
30. Roediger, H. L., III, & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 181-210. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1745-6916. 2006. 00012. x.
31. Slamecka, N. J., & Graf, P. (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4, 592-604. doi: 10. 1037/0278-7393. 4. 6. 592.
32. Sternberg, S. (1969). Memory-scanning: Mental processes revealed by reaction-time experiments. American Scientist, 57, 421-457.
33. Sungkhasettee, V. W., Friedman, M. C., & Castel, A. D. (2011). Memory and metamemory for inverted words: Illusions of competency and desirable difficulties. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 973-978. doi: 10. 3758/s13423-011-0114-9.
34. Sweller, J., van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251-296.
35. Whittlesea, B. W. A., Jacoby, L. L., & Girard, K. (1990). Illusions of immediate memory: Evidence of an attributional basis for feelings of familiarity and perceptual quality. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 716-732. doi: 10. 1016/0749-596X(90)90045-2.
36. Yap, M. J., & Balota, D. A. (2007). Additive and interactive effects on response time distributions in visual word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 274-296. doi: 10. 1037/0278-7393. 33. 2. 274.