Disfluency increased study times without improving performance, suggesting time was spent deciphering text rather than processing contents more deeply¶

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? Although disfluent materials increased study times, performance and mental effort were not higher, so longer study times appear to reflect more intense word-decoding processing. → 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

Editorial synthesis citing Eitel and Kühl (2015) and Rummer et al. (2015, Exp. 1): disfluency lengthened study time but did not raise performance or mental effort. No effect size is printed.

"Although more disfluent materials increased study times (e.g., Eitel and Kühl 2015; Rummer et al. 2015, Exp. 1), overall performance or the mental effort invested studying the contents was not higher"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Medium moderated disfluency effects on reasoning: disfluent text fostered calibration and performance on screen but not on paper — related
• Working memory capacity moderated disfluency effects in one study but not another — related
• All 13 special-issue studies failed to show overall better performance due to disfluency — a broader claim this one bears on
• Disfluency affected metacognitive monitoring (JOLs) only under specific conditions: within-subjects manipulation with unrelated word pairs, or on screen rather than paper — related
• Fluent Illusions Mislead Self Assessment — related
• Any positive effects of responding to disfluency are most likely to appear on later perceptual tasks, not content recall — related
• Disfluency does not automatically elicit effortful processing; test expectancy improves retention and transfer while disfluency has no effect — related
• The learning benefits of perceptual disfluency reported by Diemand-Yauman et al. (2011) do not replicate in any general way — related
• Low to medium disfluency does not harm learning and sometimes descriptively improves it, though the effect is unstable — reports the opposite