Relative to random choice, a metacognitive judgment of remembering boosted recall while a judgment of forgetting was associated with a memory cost¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i1 To-be-remembered items judged metacognitively beat randomly chosen items (d = 0.32), while to-be-forgotten items fell below them (d = 0.84). → Dillon H. Murphy 2023

Evidence¶

Dillon H. Murphy 2023¶

Dillon H. Murphy, Vered Halamish, Matthew G. Rhodes, & Alan D. Castel. (2023). How evaluating memorability can lead to Unintended Consequences. Metacognition and Learning (2023) 18:375–403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-023-09332-3

q2 · i1 · causal · r1

Informal cross-experiment comparison of Experiment 1 predictions against Experiment 3 words chosen somewhat randomly, across fixed and self-paced schedules. The comparison showed "a benefit for the to-be-remembered items" and "a cost for the to-be-forgotten words" relative to random choice.

"there was a benefit for the to-be-remembered items relative to those chosen without a metacognitive judgment [ t(209) = 2.33, p = .021, d = 0.32] and a cost for the to-be-forgotten words relative to those chosen without a metacognitive judgment [t(207) = 6.06, p < .001, d = 0.84]"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• When every word was judged, words circled as to-be-remembered were recalled better and words underlined as to-be-forgotten worse than a no-instruction control group's recall — related
• Judging words as likely to be forgotten enhanced their recall relative to unselected words under simultaneous presentation with fixed or self-paced study time — related
• Under sequential presentation with Likert ratings for every word, no memory benefit emerged for items judged likely to be forgotten; negative ratings predicted the poorest recall — related
• In self-cued directed forgetting, selected words were better recalled than unselected words regardless of whether they were designated to-be-remembered or to-be-forgotten — related
• When the number of remember, forget, and unselected words was equated, words predicted to be forgotten were recalled similarly to unselected words — related
• Words participants said they would remember were recalled earlier in output than words predicted to be forgotten or words not given a prediction — related
• Merely selecting words by clicking on them, without any memorability instructions, enhanced their recall (a choice effect) — related