Hertzog Christopher, Hines Jarrod C, Touron Dayna R
School of Psychology, Georgia Institute of Technology.
Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina Greensboro.
Arch Sci Psychol. 2013;1(1):23-32. doi: 10.1037/arc0000003.
When people try to learn new information (e.g., in a school setting), they often have multiple opportunities to study the material. One of the most important things to know is whether people adjust their study behavior on the basis of past success so as to increase their overall level of learning (for example, by emphasizing information they have not yet learned). Monitoring their learning is a key part of being able to make those kinds of adjustments. We used a recognition memory task to replicate prior research showing that memory for past test outcomes influences later monitoring, as measured by judgments of learning (JOLs; confidence that the material has been learned), but also to show that subjective confidence in whether the test answer and the amount of time taken to restudy the items also have independent effects on JOLs. We also show that there are individual differences in the effects of test accuracy and test confidence on JOLs, showing that some but not all people use past test experiences to guide monitoring of their new learning. Monitoring learning is therefore a complex process of considering multiple cues, and some people attend to those cues more effectively than others. Improving the quality of monitoring performance and learning could lead to better study behaviors and better learning. An individual's memory of past test performance (MPT) is often cited as the primary cue for judgments of learning (JOLs) following test experience during multi-trial learning tasks (Finn & Metcalfe, 2007; 2008). We used an associative recognition task to evaluate MPT-related phenomena, because performance monitoring, as measured by recognition test confidence judgments (CJs), is fallible and varies in accuracy across persons. The current study used multilevel regression models to show the simultaneous and independent influences of multiple cues on Trial 2 JOLs, in addition to performance accuracy (the typical measure of MPT in cued-recall experiments). These cues include recognition CJs, perceived recognition fluency, and Trial 2 study time allocation (an index of reprocessing fluency). Our results expand the scope of MPT-related phenomena in recognition memory testing to show independent effects of recognition test accuracy and CJs on second-trial JOLs, while also demonstrating individual differences in the effects of these cues on JOLs (as manifested in significant random effects for those regression effects in the model). The effect of study time on second-trial JOLs controlling on other variables, including Trial 1 recognition memory accuracy, also demonstrates that second-trial encoding behavior influence JOLs in addition to MPT.
当人们试图学习新信息时(例如,在学校环境中),他们通常有多次机会学习这些材料。需要了解的最重要的事情之一是人们是否会根据过去的成功经验来调整学习行为,以提高整体学习水平(例如,通过强调他们尚未学习的信息)。监控自己的学习是能够做出这类调整的关键部分。我们使用了一个识别记忆任务来重复先前的研究,该研究表明,对过去测试结果的记忆会影响后续的监控,这通过学习判断(JOLs;对已学习材料的信心)来衡量,但同时也表明,对测试答案的主观信心以及重新学习项目所花费的时间对学习判断也有独立的影响。我们还表明,测试准确性和测试信心对学习判断的影响存在个体差异,这表明部分但并非所有人都会利用过去的测试经验来指导对新学习的监控。因此,监控学习是一个考虑多种线索的复杂过程,有些人比其他人能更有效地关注这些线索。提高监控表现和学习的质量可能会带来更好的学习行为和更好的学习效果。在多轮学习任务中,个体对过去测试表现(MPT)的记忆通常被视为学习判断(JOLs)的主要线索(Finn & Metcalfe,2007;2008)。我们使用了一个关联识别任务来评估与MPT相关的现象,因为通过识别测试信心判断(CJs)来衡量的表现监控是容易出错的,并且在个体之间的准确性存在差异。当前的研究使用多层回归模型来展示多种线索对第二轮学习判断的同时和独立影响,除了表现准确性(线索回忆实验中MPT的典型衡量指标)。这些线索包括识别CJs、感知到的识别流畅性以及第二轮学习时间分配(再加工流畅性的一个指标)。我们的结果扩展了识别记忆测试中与MPT相关现象的范围,以展示识别测试准确性和CJs对第二轮学习判断的独立影响,同时也证明了这些线索对学习判断影响的个体差异(如模型中那些回归效应的显著随机效应所示)。在控制其他变量(包括第一轮识别记忆准确性)的情况下,学习时间对第二轮学习判断的影响也表明,除了MPT之外,第二轮编码行为也会影响学习判断。