Abstract
In two experiments, we examined the correspondence between the dynamics of metacognitive judgments and classification accuracy when participants were asked to learn category structures of different levels of complexity, i.e., to learn tasks of types I, II, and III according to Shepard et al. (1961). The stimuli were simple geometrical figures varying in the following three dimensions: color, shape, and size. In Experiment 1, we found moderate positive correlations between confidence and accuracy in task type II and weaker correlation in task type I and III. Moreover, the trend analysis in the backward learning curves revealed that there is a non-linear trend in accuracy for all three task types, but the same trend was observed in confidence for the task type I and II but not for task type III. In Experiment 2, we found that the feeling-of-warmth judgments (FOWs) showed moderate positive correlation with accuracy in all task types. Trend analysis revealed a similar non-linear component in accuracy and metacognitive judgments in task type II and III but not in task type I. Our results suggest that FOWs are a more sensitive measure of the progress of learning than confidence because FOWs capture global knowledge about the category structure, while confidence judgments are given at the level of an individual exemplar.
Highlights
Metacognitive monitoring of remembering and text comprehension has been studied extensively over recent decades (Dunlosky and Metcalfe, 2009)
The underlying rule for task type I was one-dimensional simple logical rule based on color; the conjunctive two-dimensional rule based on color and shape defined task type II; and the complex threedimensional rule defined task type III
The analysis suggests that the dynamics of feeling-of-warmth judgments (FOWs) judgments is well aligned with the dynamics of accuracy in task type II and III but not in task type I
Summary
Metacognitive monitoring of remembering and text comprehension has been studied extensively over recent decades (Dunlosky and Metcalfe, 2009). Jacoby et al (2010), Wahlheim et al (2011), Wahlheim et al (2012) performed a series of studies on metacognition during the learning of natural concepts. They introduced a novel metacognitive measure called category learning judgment (CLJ) that estimates learners’ sensitivity to differences in classification difficulty among categories (families of birds). Wahlheim et al (2012) found that CLJs are sensitive to repetitions but not to the variability of exemplars, both manipulations improved performance These findings suggest that participants are aware of the beneficial effects of repeated testing and of spaced learning but are less sensitive to the variability of exemplars. Their study choices were not related to CLJs made after initial exposure to representative exemplars, suggesting that their preferences were based on theoretical beliefs
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
