Comparing self-generated keywords with expert keywords increases bias, specifically underconfidence¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Contrary to the optimization hypothesis, bias (underconfidence) increased from the first to the second measurement time point in the keyword+external standard group but remained unchanged in the keyword-only group. → Waldeyer 2021

Evidence¶

Waldeyer 2021¶

Waldeyer, J., & Roelle, J. (2021). The keyword effect: A conceptual replication, effects on bias, and an optimization. Metacognition and Learning, 16, 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09235-7

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Planned contrast on bias across measurement time points in the same experiment. The keyword+external standard group's underconfidence increased from T1 to T2 while the keyword group's bias "remained unchanged"; the same contrast was significant for bias, t(105) = 2.45, p = .008 (one-tailed), ηp2 = .05.

"However, contrary to our expectations, for the students who additionally compared their keywords with expert ones the bias (here: level of underconfidence) increased from the first to the second measurement time point, whereas it remained unchanged in the keyword group."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Generating or comparing keywords had no substantial effect on posttest learning performance
• The keyword-quality–JOL correlation increases after comparison with expert keywords, indicating learners exploit keyword quality as a cue only when given external standards — related
• Generating delayed keywords does not reduce bias in comprehension judgments — related