Why Do Judgments of Learning Modify Memory? Evidence from Identical Pairs and Relatedness Judgments

Autor/inn/en	Halamish, Vered; Undorf, Monika
Titel	Why Do Judgments of Learning Modify Memory? Evidence from Identical Pairs and Relatedness Judgments
Quelle	In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 49 (2023) 4, S.547-556 (10 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Halamish, Vered)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0278-7393
DOI	10.1037/xlm0001174
Schlagwörter	Decision Making; Memory; Task Analysis; Recall (Psychology); Learning Processes; Cues; Associative Learning; Vocabulary Skills; Language Processing; Accuracy; Metacognition; Word Lists; English; Foreign Countries; Meta Analysis; United States; United Kingdom + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Decision-making; Entscheidungsfindung; Gedächtnis; Aufgabenanalyse; Abberufung; Learning process; Lernprozess; Stichwort; Aktiver Wortschatz; Sprachverarbeitung; Meta cognitive ability; Meta-cognition; Metakognitive Fähigkeit; Metakognition; Wortliste; English language; Englisch; Ausland; Meta-analysis; Metaanalyse; USA; Großbritannien
Abstract	Research has observed that monitoring one's own learning modifies memory for some materials but not for others. Specifically, making judgments of learning (JOLs) while learning word pairs improves subsequent cued-recall memory performance for related word pairs but not for unrelated word pairs. Theories that have attempted to explain this pattern of results assume that people attend to and process cue-target relatedness during learning more when making JOLs than they spontaneously do when not making JOLs. The present research directly tested this relatedness-processing assumption with unrelated and related word pairs as well as with hitherto unexamined materials: identical word pairs. In three experiments, participants studied word pairs while either making or not making JOLs. Results revealed that making JOLs improved memory for related word pairs as well as for identical word pairs, but not for unrelated word pairs. Importantly, in two of the experiments, participants were further asked to judge at test whether each cue appeared with an unrelated, related, or identical target before attempting to recall it. Results revealed that making JOLs improved the accuracy of these relatedness judgments independently from its effect on recall, thus providing direct evidence that people process cue-target relatedness when making JOLs more than they spontaneously do when not making JOLs. These findings contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of why judging one's own learning can modify memory and, more broadly, suggest that instructions to monitor learning can direct people's attention to information that is not or less processed otherwise. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	American Psychological Association. Journals Department, 750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002. Tel: 800-374-2721; Tel: 202-336-5510; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: order@apa.org; Web site: http://www.apa.org
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01