Learners generally underestimate how fast they will learn word pairs, and this underconfidence is larger for low-variability lists¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 In Experiment 1, participants judged they would need more study trials than they actually did, and this was reliably more pronounced for the low-variability list (M = −.85) than the high-variability list (M = −.58), d = 0.51. → Jemstedt 2017

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 · i2 · causal · r2

Absolute-accuracy secondary analysis in Experiment 1 compared mean TTL judgments with actual TTL performance; t(30) = 2.20, p = .036, "d = 0.51". The authors relate the general underconfidence to a stability bias and note the low-variability list was in fact easier to learn across tests.

"Participants generally judged that they would need more study trials to learn each word pair than they actually did, and this effect was reliably more pronounced for the low- (M = −.85, SD = .69) than for the high-variability list ( M = −.58 SD =. 2 9 ) ,t(30) = 2.20, p = .036, mean difference = .27, 95% CI [.02, .52], d = 0.51."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• EOL judgments are highly accurate when items vary widely in difficulty within a list, but poorly accurate when variation is small — related
• The more underconfident participants are about their memory abilities, the larger their reminder bias, regardless of framing — related
• Guessing biases calibration measures toward underconfidence, strongest for the lowest performers — related
• Underconfidence-with-practice effect: learners overestimate learning after one study trial but underestimate it after repeated restudying — related
• Metacognitive monitoring bias and precision modulate when students stop studying relative to their goals — related