School of Human Kinetics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.
Hum Mov Sci. 2016 Feb;45:63-70. doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2015.11.006. Epub 2015 Nov 19.
Studies have consistently shown that prospective metacognitive judgments of learning are often inaccurate because humans mistakenly interpret current performance levels as valid indices of learning. These metacognitive discrepancies are strongly related to conditions of practice. Here, we examined how the type of feedback (after good versus poor trials) received during practice and awareness (aware versus unaware) of this manipulation affected judgments of learning and actual learning. After each six-trial block, participants received feedback on their three best trials or three worst trials and half of the participants were made explicitly aware of the type of feedback they received while the other half were unaware. Judgments of learning were made at the end of each six-trial block and before the 24-h retention test. Results indicated no motor performance differences between groups in practice or retention; however, receiving feedback on relatively good compared to relatively poor trials resulted in significantly higher judgments of learning in practice and retention, irrespective of awareness. These results suggest that KR on relatively good versus relatively poor trials can have dissociable effects on judgments of learning in the absence of actual learning differences, even when participants are made aware of their feedback manipulation.
研究一致表明，前瞻性元认知学习判断往往不准确，因为人类错误地将当前的表现水平解释为学习的有效指标。这些元认知差异与练习条件密切相关。在这里，我们研究了在练习过程中接收到的反馈类型（在好的和差的试次之后）以及对这种操作的意识（有意识和无意识）如何影响学习判断和实际学习。在每六个试次块结束后，参与者会收到他们三个最佳试次或三个最差试次的反馈，其中一半参与者会明确意识到他们收到的反馈类型，而另一半则不知道。学习判断是在每个六个试次块结束时和 24 小时保留测试之前进行的。结果表明，练习和保留过程中各组之间的运动表现没有差异；然而，与相对较差的试次相比，收到相对较好的试次的反馈会导致练习和保留中的学习判断明显提高，无论是否有意识。这些结果表明，即使参与者意识到他们的反馈操作，KR 在相对较好的试次和相对较差的试次上的差异也可以对学习判断产生分离的影响，而不会导致实际学习差异。
