Undorf Monika, Söllner Anke, Bröder Arndt
Department of Psychology, School of Social Sciences, University of Mannheim, Schloss, Ehrenhof-Ost, 68131, Mannheim, Germany.
Mem Cognit. 2018 May;46(4):507-519. doi: 10.3758/s13421-017-0780-6.
There is much evidence that metacognitive judgments, such as people's predictions of their future memory performance (judgments of learning, JOLs), are inferences based on cues and heuristics. However, relatively little is known about whether and when people integrate multiple cues in one metacognitive judgment or focus on a single cue without integrating further information. The current set of experiments systematically addressed whether and to what degree people integrate multiple extrinsic and intrinsic cues in JOLs. Experiment 1 varied two cues: number of study presentations (1 vs. 2) and font size (18 point vs. 48 point). Results revealed that people integrated both cues in their JOLs. Experiment 2 demonstrated that the two word characteristics concreteness (abstract vs. concrete) and emotionality (neutral vs. emotional) were integrated in JOLs. Experiment 3 showed that people integrated all four cues in their JOLs when manipulated simultaneously. Finally, Experiment 4 confirmed integration of three cues that varied on a continuum rather than in two easily distinguishable levels. These results demonstrate that people have a remarkable capacity to integrate multiple cues in metacognitive judgments. In addition, our findings render an explanation of cue effects on JOLs in terms of demand characteristics implausible.
有大量证据表明，元认知判断，比如人们对自己未来记忆表现的预测（学习判断，JOLs），是基于线索和启发式策略的推断。然而，对于人们是否以及何时会在一个元认知判断中整合多个线索，或者专注于单个线索而不整合更多信息，我们所知相对较少。当前这组实验系统地探讨了人们是否以及在何种程度上会在学习判断中整合多个外在和内在线索。实验1改变了两个线索：学习呈现的次数（1次与2次）和字体大小（18磅与48磅）。结果显示，人们在学习判断中整合了这两个线索。实验2表明，两个单词特征，即具体性（抽象与具体）和情感性（中性与情感），在学习判断中被整合。实验3表明，当同时操纵所有四个线索时，人们在学习判断中整合了所有四个线索。最后，实验4证实了在一个连续体上变化而非在两个易于区分的水平上变化的三个线索的整合。这些结果表明，人们在元认知判断中具有整合多个线索的显著能力。此外，我们的研究结果使得基于需求特征对学习判断线索效应的解释变得不合理。
