The type of EOL task (difficulty vs. trials-to-learn scale) does not reliably affect EOL accuracy¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1–r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In Experiment 2, with EOL task manipulated between groups, mean gamma did not reliably differ between the difficulty task (M = .82) and TTL task (M = .76), p = .226. → Jemstedt 2017 q3 i? In Experiment 3 the nil finding replicated: difficulty task M = .62 vs. TTL task M = .61, p = .863. → Jemstedt 2017 (2)

Evidence¶

Jemstedt 2017¶

Jemstedt, A., Kubik, V., & Jönsson, F. U. (2017). What moderates the accuracy of ease of learning judgments? Metacognition and Learning, 12, 337–355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-017-9172-3

q3 · i? · causal · r1

Experiment 2 between-groups study with 48 undergraduates removed the task-order confound of Experiment 1; the TTL-task advantage did not replicate, t(46) = 1.23, p = .226. The authors conclude making a judgment twice, not the task itself, may have driven the Experiment 1 effect.

"meanG for the two EOL tasks did not reliably differ (difficulty task: M =. 8 2 ,SD =. 1 5 ;T T Lt a s k :M = .76, SD = .15), t(46) = 1.23, p = .226, mean difference = .05, 95% CI = [−.03, .14], d = .35."

Jemstedt 2017 (2)¶

Jemstedt, A., Kubik, V., & Jönsson, F. U. (2017). What moderates the accuracy of ease of learning judgments? Metacognition and Learning, 12, 337–355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-017-9172-3

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Experiment 3 replicated the nil effect of EOL task with 64 participants, F(1, 56) = .03, p = .863. The authors state the EOL task, as operationalized, did not affect EOL accuracy, nor did task–criterion consistency (transfer-appropriate monitoring was not supported).

"there was no difference in EOL accuracy between the difficulty (M =. 6 2 ,SD = .20) and the TTL task (M =. 6 1 ,SD =. 1 9 ) ,F(1, 56) = .03, p =. 8 6 3 ,m e a nd i f f e r e n c e=. 0 1 ,9 5 %C I=[−.09, .11], d =. 0 5 ."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Presentation format (sequential vs. simultaneous) does not reliably affect EOL accuracy — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• EOL judgments rely heavily on semantic relatedness, whose predictive validity appears to cap attainable EOL accuracy — related
• EOL relative accuracy is reliably higher when correlated with a binary recall criterion than with a trials-to-learn criterion — related
• EOL judgments are highly accurate when items vary widely in difficulty within a list, but poorly accurate when variation is small — related