JOL magnitudes decline across successive lists in both JOL groups, reflecting learners' belief that recall decreases with continued new learning¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r3 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 Interim JOL magnitudes showed a significant main effect of list (F(2.47, 172.75) = 20.83, p < .001, ω²p = .06) but no effect of JOL type and no interaction; post-hoc contrasts reached d = 0.74. → Veit Kubik 2022

Evidence¶

Veit Kubik 2022¶

Veit Kubik, Kenneth Koslowski, Torsten Schubert, Alp Aslan. (2022). Metacognitive judgments can potentiate new learning: The role of covert retrieval. Metacognition and Learning (2022) 17:1057–1077. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-022-09307-w

q3 · i2 · causal · r3

Two-factorial ANOVA on Lists 1–4 interim JOL magnitudes for both JOL groups in the same experiment; post-hoc tests showed JOLs decreased between early and later lists (e.g., List 1 vs. List 4, t(70) = 6.17, p < .001, d = 0.74), which the authors read as learners' belief that interim recall decreases with new learning.

"The results revealed that there was a significant main effect of list, F(2.47, 172.75) = 20.83, p < .001, ̂ω2p = .06, but neither a main effect of practice type (JOLs with word stems vs. JOLs with complete words), F(1, 70) = 0.05, p = .821, ̂ω2p < .001"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• On the final cumulative test, JOLs with word stems and retrieval practice improve List-5 recall over restudy, while restudy shows a List-1 advantage — related
• Overt retrieval practice enhances interim recall of new List-5 material compared to restudy, and does not differ from JOLs with word stems — related
• Making JOLs with word stems enhances interim recall of new List-5 material compared to restudy — related
• JOLs with word stems and retrieval practice reduce prior-list intrusions on the List-5 test, whereas JOLs with complete words do not — related
• Making JOLs with complete words did not significantly enhance interim recall of new List-5 material compared to restudy — related
• Aging does not materially reduce the relative accuracy (resolution) of judgments of learning during encoding, with cross-sectional evidence of no age declines and even age-related increases in aggregate JOL resolution across ages 18 to 81 — related
• Delayed JOL bias: multiple text readers are underconfident, rereaders overconfident at one day, and single readers overconfident at one week — related
• Anchoring-and-adjustment explains the underconfidence-with-practice effect, with JOLs anchored between 30 and 50% correct recall — related
• Making JOLs is not a neutral act: metacognitive ratings reactively affect subsequent learning, so experiments need judgment-free conditions — related
• Students gave higher judgments of learning after restudy than after retrieval practice in Experiment 2 but not in Experiment 1 — related