Disfluency affected metacognitive monitoring (JOLs) only under specific conditions: within-subjects manipulation with unrelated word pairs, or on screen rather than paper¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Disfluency reduced JOLs only when manipulated within-subjects and only for unrelated word pairs, because item relatedness otherwise replaced disfluency as a monitoring cue. → Tim Kühl & Alexander Eitel 2016

Evidence¶

Tim Kühl & Alexander Eitel 2016¶

Tim Kühl & Alexander Eitel. (2016). Effects of disfluency on cognitive and metacognitive processes and outcomes. Metacognition and Learning, 11, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-016-9154-x

q2 · i? · review · r2

Narrative review of Magreehan et al. (2015) and related studies; the review reports that disfluency affected JOLs only under within-subjects manipulation and unrelated word pairs. No effect size is printed.

"disfluency affected monitoring only when it was manipulated within-subjects, because only then, the learner recognized a difference between fluent and disfluent presentation."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Medium moderated disfluency effects on reasoning: disfluent text fostered calibration and performance on screen but not on paper — related
• Disfluency increased study times without improving performance, suggesting time was spent deciphering text rather than processing contents more deeply — related
• All 13 special-issue studies failed to show overall better performance due to disfluency — related
• Disfluency affects judgments of learning only when it is the only available cue; item relatedness overpowers it — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)