Processing fluency mediates the influence of perceptual information on monitoring learning of educationally relevant materials

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 336-348

  Hunter Ball, B ^a   Klein, Kathleen N ^a   Brewer, Gene A ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Control; Fluency; Judgments of learning; Metamemory; Monitoring

Indexed keywords

ADULT; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; PERCEPTION; PHYSIOLOGY; RECALL; RECOGNITION; TEACHING; TIME;

ADULT; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MENTAL RECALL; PERCEPTION; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); TEACHING MATERIALS; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84925630764     PISSN: 1076898X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/xap0000023     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2009). Uniting the tribes of fluency to form a metacognitive nation. Personality and Social Psychology Review: An Official Journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 219-235.
2. 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. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.136.4.569
3. Arbuckle, T. Y., & Cuddy, L. L. (1969). Discrimination of item strength at time of presentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 126-131. doi:10.1037/h0027455
4. 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. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(89)90016-8
5. 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.
6. Carpenter, S. K., Wilford, M. M., Kornell, N., & Mullaney, K. M. (2013). Appearances can be deceiving: Instructor fluency increases perceptions of learning without increasing actual learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 1350-1356. doi:10.3758/s13423-013-0442-z
7. Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684. doi:10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X
8. Diemand-Yauman, C., Oppenheimer, D. M., & Vaughan, E. B. (2011). Fortune favors the bold (and the italicized): Effects of disfluency on educational outcomes. Cognition, 118, 111-115. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2010.09.012
9. Dougherty, M. R., Scheck, P., Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (2005). Using the past to predict the future. Memory & Cognition, 33, 1096-1115. doi:10.3758/BF03193216
10. Dunlosky, J., & Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
11. Eitel, A., Kühl, T. I. M., Scheiter, K., & Gerjets, P. (in press). Disfluency meets cognitive load in multimedia learning: Does harder-to-read mean better-to-understand? Applied Cognitive Psychology.
12. Hart, J. T. (1965). Memory and the feeling of knowing experience. Journal of Educational Psychology, 56, 208-216. doi:10.1037/h0022263
13. Hart, J. T. (1967). Memory and the memory-monitoring process. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 6, 685-691.
14. Hertzog, C., Dunlosky, J., Robinson, A. E., & Kidder, D. P. (2003). Encoding fluency is a cue used for judgments about learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 22-34. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.29.1.22
15. Hines, J. C., Touron, D. R., & Hertzog, C. (2009). Metacognitive influences on study time allocation in an associative recognition task: An analysis of adult age differences. Psychology and Aging, 24, 462-475. doi:10.1037/a0014417
16. Hox, J. J. (2002). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
17. Karpicke, J. D., Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L. (2009). Metacognitive strategies in student learning: Do students practice retrieval when they study on their own? Memory, 17, 471-479. doi:10.1080/09658210802647009
18. Kelley, C. M., & Rhodes, M. G. (2002). Making sense and nonsense of experience: Attributions in memory and judgment. In B. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning & motivation (pp. 293-320). New York, NY: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/S0079-7421(02)80010-X
19. King, J. E., Zechmeister, E. B., & Shaughnessy, J. J. (1980). Judgments of knowing: The influence of retrieval practice. American Journal of Psychology, 93, 329-343. doi:10.2307/1422236
20. King, L. (2010). The science of psychology: An appreciative view. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
21. Koriat, A. (1997). Monitoring one's own knowledge during study: A cue-utilization approach to JOLs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 349-370. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.126.4.349
22. Koriat, A. (2008). Easy comes, easy goes? The link between learning and remembering and its exploitation in metacognition. Memory & Cognition, 36, 416-428. doi:10.3758/MC.36.2.416
23. Koriat, A., & Bjork, R. A. (2005). Illusions of competence in monitoring one's knowledge during study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 187-194. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.31.2.187
24. Koriat, A., & Bjork, R. A. (2006). Mending metacognitive illusions: A comparison of mnemonic-based and theory-based procedures. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 1133-1145. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.32.5.1133
25. 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
26. Kornell, N., Rhodes, M. G., Castel, A. D., & Tauber, S. K. (2011). The ease-of-processing heuristic and the stability bias: Dissociating memory, memory beliefs, and memory judgments. Psychological Science, 22, 787-794. doi:10.1177/0956797611407929
27. 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, 464-467. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.16.3.464
28. Mazzoni, G., & Comoldi, C. (1993). Strategies in study time allocation: Why is study time sometimes not effective? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 47-60. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.122.1.47
29. Mazzoni, G., Cornoldi, C., & Marchitelli, G. (1990). Do memorability ratings affect study-time allocation? Memory & Cognition, 18, 196-204. doi:10.3758/BF03197095
30. McDonough, I. M., & Gallo, D. A. (2012). Illusory expectations can affect retrieval-monitoring accuracy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 391-404. doi:10.1037/a0025548
31. Metcalfe, J., & Dunlosky, J. (2008). Metamemory. In H. L. Roediger, III (Ed.), Learning and memory: A comprehensive reference (pp. 349-362). Oxford, England: Elsevier.
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. Metcalfe, J., & Kornell, N. (2003). The dynamics of learning and allocation of study time to a region of proximal learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 530-542. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.132.4.530
34. Metcalfe, J., & Kornell, N. (2005). A region of proximal learning model of study time allocation. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 463-477. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2004.12.001
35. Metcalfe, J. & Finn, B. (in press). Metacognition and control of study choice in children. Metacognition and Learning.
36. Miele, D. B., Finn, B., & Molden, D. C. (2011). Does easily learned mean easily remembered?: It depends on your beliefs about intelligence. Psychological Science, 22, 320-324. doi:10.1177/0956797610397954
37. Miele, D. B., & Molden, D. C. (2010). Naive theories of intelligence and the role of processing fluency in perceived comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139, 535-557. doi:10.1037/a0019745
38. Miller, G. A., Galanter, E., & Pribram, K. H. (1960). Plans and the structure of behavior. New York, NY: Henry Holt. doi:10.1037/10039-000
39. Mueller, M. L., Dunlosky, J., Tauber, S. K., & Rhodes, M. G. (2014). The font-size effect on judgments of learning: Does it exemplify fluency effects or reflect people's beliefs about memory? Journal of Memory and Language, 70, 1-12. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2013.09.007
40. 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
41. 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
42. Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 125-173). New York, NY: Academic Press. doi: 10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60053-5
43. Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1994). Why investigate metacognition? In J. Metcalfe & A. P. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 1-25). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
44. Peterson, S. (1992). The cognitive function of underlining as a study technique. Reading Research and Instruction, 31, 49-56. doi:10.1080/19388079209558078
45. Preacher, K. J., Zyphur, M. J., & Zhang, Z. (2010). A general multilevel SEM framework for assessing multilevel mediation. Psychological Methods, 15, 209-233. doi:10.1037/a0020141
46. Pressley, M., & Ghatala, E. S. (1990). Self-regulated learning: Monitoring learning from text. Educational Psychologist, 25, 19-33. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2501_3
47. 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. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.28.1.69
48. 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
49. Rhodes, M. G., & Castel, A. D. (2009). Metacognitive illusions for auditory information: Effects on monitoring and control. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 550-554. doi:10.3758/PBR.16.3.550
50. Serra, M. J., & Dunlosky, J. (2010). Metacomprehension judgments reflect the belief that diagrams improve learning from text. Memory, 18, 698-711. doi:10.1080/09658211.2010.506441
51. Serra, M. J., & Metcalfe, J. (2009). Effective implementation of metacognition. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition and education (pp. 278-298). New York, NY: Routledge.
52. 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.1467-9280.1992.tb00680.x
53. 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
54. Tauber, S. K., & Rhodes, M. G. (2012). Multiple bases for young and older adults' judgments of learning in multitrial learning. Psychology and Aging, 27, 474-483. doi:10.1037/a0025246
55. Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. C. 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
56. Thiede, K. T., & Dunlosky, J. (1999). Toward a general model of selfregulated study: An analysis of selection of items for study and selfpaced study time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 1024-1037. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.25.4.1024
57. Undorf, M., & Erdfelder, E. (2011). Judgments of learning reflect encoding fluency: Conclusive evidence for the ease-of-processing hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 1264-1269. doi:10.1037/a0023719
58. Undorf, M., & Erdfelder, E. (2013). Separation of encoding fluency and item difficulty effects on judgments of learning. The Quarterly Journal of Experiment Psychology, 66, 2060-2072. doi:10.1080/17470218.2013.777751
59. Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277-304). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
60. Yue, C. L., Castel, A. D., & Bjork, R. A. (2013). When disfluency is-and is not-a desirable difficulty: The influence of typeface clarity on metacognitive judgments and memory. Memory & Cognition, 41, 229-241. doi:10.3758/s13421-012-0255-8