Experiment 2 replicated the forward effect of cue-only JOLs over restudy with rock categories, and item-by-item feedback did not change the effect¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr3·q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · checked against its sources 2026-10-21 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? The beneficial forward effect of cue-only JOLs over restudy generalized to inductive learning of rock types, and adding correct-answer feedback did not modulate it. → Ritter 2025
Evidence¶
Ritter 2025¶
Ritter, C., Hausman, H., Gaschler, R., Tiffin-Richards, S. P., & Kubik, V. (2025). The Forward Effect of Judgements of Learning on Memory and Transfer in Inductive Learning. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10094-4
q3 · i? · causal · r3
Preregistered three-condition between-subjects experiment (166 included participants) comparing cue-only JOLs with feedback, cue-only JOLs without feedback, and restudy using rock photographs. The detailed results section was not available in the supplied text, so this finding is stated as the article's abstract reports it.
"Experiment 2 replicated the beneficial forward effect of cue-only JOLs over restudy with different materials and found that providing item-by-item feedback did not change the effect."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- In Experiment 1, interim tasks with high retrieval probability (overt retrieval, cue-only JOLs) enhanced new inductive learning more than low-retrieval tasks (cue–target JOLs, restudy) on both memory and transfer — a broader claim this one bears on
- In Experiment 1, cue-only JOLs produced significantly better Phase B memory and transfer than restudy, while overt retrieval's memory advantage over restudy was only marginal — related
- Cue-only JOLs performed similarly to overt retrieval, and cue–target JOLs similarly to restudy, on Phase B memory and transfer (Experiment 1) — related
- In Experiment 1, the interim learning task did not affect Phase A posttest performance, indicating the forward benefit was not due to improved prior learning — related
- Cue-only JOLs, but not cue–target JOLs, showed the inverted U-shaped JOL–response-time relationship taken as a behavioral signature of covert retrieval (Experiment 1) — related
- Self-reported retrieval use moderated the forward benefit of cue-only JOLs: higher retrieval ratings predicted better Phase B memory and transfer only in the cue-only JOLs condition — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
cue-only-jol-forward-effect-feedback-null-replication |
title |
Experiment 2 replicated the forward effect of cue-only JOLs over restudy with rock categories, and item-by-item feedback did not change the effect |
description |
Experiment 2 replicated the forward effect of cue-only JOLs over restudy with rock categories, and item-by-item feedback did not change the effect |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2025 |
source_checked |
2026-10-21 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-21 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — ritter-2025 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.