Empirical Analysis of the Intrinsic-Extrinsic Distinction of Judgments of Learning (JOLs): Effects of Relatedness and Serial Position on JOLs

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 27, Issue 5, 2001, Pages 1180-1191

  Dunlosky, John ^a   Matvey, Greg ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT GREENSBORO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEARNING; MALE; PAIRED ASSOCIATE LEARNING; REACTION TIME; RECALL; SEMANTICS;

ADULT; ATTENTION; CUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; JUDGMENT; MALE; MENTAL RECALL; PAIRED-ASSOCIATE LEARNING; REACTION TIME; SEMANTICS; SERIAL LEARNING;

EID: 85043500316     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.27.5.1180     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Arbuckle, T. Y., & Cuddy, L. L. (1969). Discrimination of item strength at time of presentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 126-131.
2. Begg, I, Vinski, E., Frankovich, L., & Holgate, B. (1991). Generating makes words memorable but so does effective reading. Memory & Cognition, 19, 487-497.
3. Benjamin, A. S., Bjork, R. A., & Schwartz, B. L. (1998). The mismeasure of memory: When retrieval fluency is misleading as a metacognitive index. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 55-68.
4. Bieman-Copland, S., & Charness, N. (1994). Memory knowledge and memory monitoring in adulthood. Psychology and Aging, 9, 287-302.
5. Brooks, B. M. (1994). A comparison of primacy items in free recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 9, 143-148.
6. Brooks, B. M. (1999). Primacy and recency in primed free association and associative cued recall. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 6, 479-485.
7. Busey, T. A., Tunnicliff, J., Loftus, G. R., & Loftus, E. F. (2000). Accounts of the confidence-accuracy relation in recognition memory. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 7, 26-48.
8. Carroll, M., & Nelson, T. O. (1993). Effect of overlearning on the feeling of knowing is more detectable in within-subject than in between-subject designs. American Journal of Psychology, 106, 227-235.
9. Carroll, M., Nelson, T. O., & Kirwan, A. (1997). Tradeoff of semantic relatedness and degree of overleaming: Differential effects on metamemory and on long-term retention. Acta Psychologica, 95, 239-253.
10. Connor, L. T., Dunlosky, J., & Hertzog, C. (1997). Age-related differences in absolute but not relative metamemory accuracy. Psychology and Aging, 12, 50-71.
11. Dunlosky, J., & Hertzog, C. (1998). Aging and deficits in associative memory: What is the role of strategy production? Psychology and Aging, 13, 597-607.
12. Dunlosky, J., & Hertzog, C. (2000). Updating knowledge about encoding strategies: A componential analysis of learning about strategy effectiveness from task experience. Psychology & Aging, 15, 462-474.
13. Dunlosky, J., Hunt, R. R., & Clark, E. (2000). Is perceptual salience needed in explanations of the isolation effect? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 649-657.
14. Dunlosky, J., Kubat, A., Hertzog, C. (2000). Do age-related differences exist in monitoring learning? Effects of aging on the magnitude and accuracy of quality-of-encoding judgments. Manuscript submitted for publication.
15. Dunlosky, J., & Nelson, T. O. (1994). Does the sensitivity of judgments of learning (JOLs) to the effects of various study activities depend on when the JOLs occur? Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 545-565.
16. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87, 215-251.
17. Hacker, D. J., Dunlosky, J., & Graesser, A. C. (Eds.). (1998). Metacognition in educational theory and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Hertzog, C., Kidder, D. P., Powell-Moman, A., & Dunlosky, J. (in press). Aging and monitoring associative learning: Is monitoring accuracy spared or impaired? Psychology and Aging.
19. Kelemen, W. L., Frost, P. J., & Weaver, C. A., III. (2000). Individual differences in metacognition: Evidence against a general metacognitive ability. Memory & Cognition, 28, 92-107.
20. Keren, G. (1991). Calibration and probability judgments: Conceptual and methodological issues. Acta Psychologica, 77, 217-273.
21. King, J. F., Zechmeister, E. B., & Shaughnessy, J. J. (1980). Judgments of knowing: The influence of retrieval practice. American Journal of Psychology, 93, 329-343.
22. 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.
23. 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.
24. Lovelace, E. A. (1984). Metamemory: Monitoring future recallability during study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 756-766.
25. Maki, R. H., & Berry, S. L. (1984). Metacomprehension of text material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 673-679.
26. Matvey, G., Dunlosky, J., & Guttentag, R. (2001). Fluency of retrieval at study affects judgments of learning (JOLs): An analytic or nonanalytic basis for JOLs? Memory & Cognition, 29, 222-233.
27. Mazzoni, G., Comoldi, C., Tomat, L., & Vecchi, T. (1997). Remembering the grocery shopping list: A study on metacognitive biases. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11, 253-267.
28. Mazzoni, G., & Nelson, T. O. (Eds.). (1998). Metacognition and cognitive neuropsychology. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
29. Metcalfe, J., & Shimamura, A. J. (Eds.). (1994). Metacognition: Knowing about knowing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
30. Nelson, T. O., & Dunlosky, J. (1991). When people's judgments of learning (JOLs) are extremely accurate at predicting subsequent recall. Psychological Science, 2, 267-270.
31. Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 26, pp. 125-173). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
32. Price, P. C., & Yates, J. F. (1993). Judgmental overshadowing: Further evidence of cue interaction in contingency judgment. Memory & Cognition, 21, 561-572.
33. Rabinowitz, J. C., Ackerman, B. P., Craik, F. I. M., & Hinchley, J. L. (1982). Aging and metamemory: The roles of relatedness and imagery. Journal of Gerontology, 37, 688-695.
34. Schwartz, B. L., Benjamin, A. S., & Bjork, R. A. (1997). The inferential and experiential bases of metamemory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 6, 132-137.
35. Son, L. K., & Metcalfe, J. (2000). Metacognitive and control strategies in study-time allocation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1-19.
36. Thiede, K. W. (1996). The relative importance of anticipated test format and anticipated test difficulty on performance. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 49A, 901-918.
37. Thiede, K. W., & Dunlosky, J. (1999). Toward a general model of self-regulated study: An analysis of selection items for study and self-paced study time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 1024-1037.
38. Wilson, T. D., Houston, C. E., Etling, K. M., & Brekke, N. (1996). A new look at anchoring effects: Basic anchoring and its antecedents. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125, 387-402.