Metacognitive illusions for auditory information: Effects on monitoring and control

Judgments of learning (JOLs) are assessments of how well materials have been learned. Although a wide body of literature has demonstrated a reliable correlation between memory performance and JOLs, relatively little is known about the nature of this link. Here, we investigate the relationship between JOLs and the memory retrieval processes engaged on a subsequent memory test. Participants first studied cue-target word pairs and assigned JOLs to each. Later, memory for the cue word in each pair was assessed using an old/new recognition memory task, and electrophysiological measures of familiarity and recollection were examined. Recognition accuracy was superior for materials given high rather than low JOLs. Analysis of event-related potentials (ERPs) revealed that for both high and low JOL items, successful recognition elicited correlates of familiarity (the mid-frontal effect) and recollection (the left-parietal effect). Importantly, however, the magnitude of the familiarity correlate was equal for high and low JOL items, whereas the magnitude of the recollection correlate was significantly larger for items given high JOLs. These findings demonstrate that JOLs made at study correlate with memory retrieval at test-but that this correlation is specific to recollection. The electrophysiological data support the broader view that participants focus on contextual cues when making JOLs, which may later aid recollection.

Although perceptual information is utilized to judge size or depth, little work has investigated whether such information is used to make memory predictions. The present study examined how the font size of to-be-remembered words influences predicted memory performance. Participants studied words for a free-recall test that varied in font size and made judgments of learning (JOLs) for each item. JOLs were influenced by font size, as larger font sizes were given higher JOLs, whereas little relationship was evident between font size and recall. The effect was modified when other, more valid, sources of information (e.g., associative strength) were available when JOLs were made and persisted despite experience with multiple study-test sessions, use of a forgetting scale to assess predictions, and explicit warning of participants that font size has little effect on memory performance. When ease of reading was manipulated, such that large font size words were made less fluent, the effect was eliminated. Thus, highly accessible perceptual cues can strongly influence JOLs, likely via encoding fluency, and this effect can lead to metacognitive illusions

The current study examined predictions of memory performance as a function of the amount of information to be remembered. In four experiments participants studied and made judgements of learning (JOLs) for long or short lists of words. Results demonstrated that participants provided lower JOLs for long compared with short lists. However, whereas JOLs for short lists strongly corresponded with memory performance, participants' JOLs were consistently overconfident for long lists. Participants were unable to remedy this overconfidence for long lists even when provided information about the list length conditions or warned that a long list of words is difficult to learn. Only when given a prior list learning experience were JOLs for a long list consistent with memory performance. These data indicate that predictions of memory performance are sensitive to the amount of material TBR. However, predictions only correspond with the amount of information to-be-remembered under limited circumstances, providing support for frameworks which suggest that memory predictions are inferential in nature.

Prior work has shown that judgments of learning (JOLs) are prone to an auditory metacognitive illusion such that loud words are given higher predictions than quiet words despite no differences in recall as a function of auditory intensity. The current study investigated whether judgments of remembering and knowing (JORKs)—judgments that focus participants on whether or not recollective details will be remembered—are less susceptible to such an illusion. In Experiment 1, participants studied single words, making item-by-item JOLs or JORKs immediately after study. Indeed, although increased volume elevated judgement magnitude for both JOLs and JORKs, the effect was significantly attenuated when JORKs were elicited. Experiment 2 replicated this finding and additionally demonstrated that participants making JORKs were less likely than participants making JOLs to choose to restudy quiet words relative to loud words. Taken together, these results suggest that JORKs are impacted less—in terms of both metacognitive monitoring and control—by irrelevant perceptual information than JOLs. More generally, these data support the contention that metacognitive illusions can be attenuated by simply changing the way metacognitive judgments are solicited, an important finding given that subjective experiences guide self-regulated learning.

Weight is conceptualized as an embodiment of importance, according to recent research on embodied cognition (Ackerman, Nocera, & Bargh, 2010; Jostmann, Lakens, & Schubert, 2009). Is importance as embodied by weight used as a cue that items are memorable? Four experiments varied participants' perceptual experiences of weight as they studied words and predicted later memory performance via judgments of learning (JOLs) for a recall (Experiment 1) or recognition (Experiments 2-4) memory test. Greater weight was associated with higher JOLs, although weight did not affect actual memory performance. The relationship between weight and JOLs disappeared when participants were primed to think of cases where lightweight is a positive attribute and heavyweight is a negative attribute (Experiment 4). Even cognition about our own cognition is embodied.

The effects of encoding fluency and retrieval fluency on judgments of learning

Past research has shown that the perceptual characteristics of studied items (e.g., font size) lead to a metamemory illusion, and that delayed judgements of learning (JOLs) are better predictors of memory performance than immediate JOLs. Here, we tested whether delayed JOLs could reduce or eliminate the effect of perceptual characteristics on JOLs and restudy decisions. We adopted a meta-analytic approach and analysed the results of 28 experiments in which participants' studied items were presented in either large or small font. JOLs and, sometimes, restudy decisions were collected either immediately or after a delay. Finally, participants completed a memory test. The results of the meta-analyses confirmed the effect of the font size on JOLs and restudy decisions. The delayed procedures reliably reduced the effect of perceptual characteristics on JOLs, but the effect was still significant after a delay. For restudy decisions, delayed procedures only reduced numerically the effect. Surprisingly, the meta-analysis also showed a very subtle memory advantage for items presented in large font over small font, although no individual study showed a significant difference and the overall effect size was small. One plausible explanation is that after a delay, information about font size is not available for some items, causing a reduction in the effect. Moreover, our results suggest that the dissociation between memory and metamemory reported previously may not be dissociation at all, but a mistmatched effect of font size on memory and metamemory.

Abstract. Two experiments examined the effect of prior knowledge on memory and metamemory for names and faces using famous 1960s and 2000s actors as the manipulation of prior knowledge. In Experiment 1, 66 participants studied the names of famous actors, half presented with their faces, with instructions to remember only the names. In Experiment 2, 56 participants studied the faces of these actors, half presented with their names, with instructions to remember only the faces. In both experiments, participants made immediate Judgments of Learning (JOLs) for each to-be-remembered stimulus followed by a test of recognition that used a Recollect/Familiar/No-Memory judgment. We found higher JOLs, recognition memory, and JOL accuracy for 2000s actors. Adding a name to a face or a face to a name increased JOLs while paradoxically decreasing memory. Back-sorting and binning analyses converged on the conclusion that immediate JOLs predicted memories accompanied by recollection but not familiarity.

Many studies have examined the accuracy of predictions of future memory performance solicited through judgments of learning (JOLs). Among the most robust findings in this literature is that delaying predictions serves to substantially increase the relative accuracy of JOLs compared with soliciting JOLs immediately after study, a finding termed the delayed JOL effect. The meta-analyses reported in the current study examined the predominant theoretical accounts as well as potential moderators of the delayed JOL effect. The first meta-analysis examined the relative accuracy of delayed compared with immediate JOLs across 4,554 participants (112 effect sizes) through gamma correlations between JOLs and memory accuracy. Those data showed that delaying JOLs leads to robust benefits to relative accuracy (g = 0.93). The second meta-analysis examined memory performance for delayed compared with immediate JOLs across 3,807 participants (98 effect sizes). Those data showed that delayed JOLs result in a modest but reliable benefit for memory performance relative to immediate JOLs (g = 0.08). Findings from these meta-analyses are well accommodated by theories suggesting that delayed JOL accuracy reflects access to more diagnostic information from long-term memory rather than being a by-product of a retrieval opportunity. However, these data also suggest that theories proposing that the delayed JOL effect results from a memorial benefit or the match between the cues available for JOLs and those available at test may also provide viable explanatory mechanisms necessary for a comprehensive account.

Does visualization affect monitoring accuracy, restudy choice, and comprehension scores of students in primary education?

Judgments of learning (JOLs) are sometimes influenced by factors that do not impact actual memory performance. One recent proposal is that perceptual fluency during encoding affects metamemory and is a basis of metacognitive illusions. In the present experiments, participants identified aurally presented words that contained inter-spliced silences (the generate condition) or that were intact, a manipulation analogous to visual generation manipulations. The generate condition produced lower perceptual fluency as assessed by both accuracy and identification latency. Consistent with the perceptual fluency hypothesis, the less fluent, generate condition produced lower JOLs than the intact condition. However, actual memory performance was greater in the generation than intact condition in free recall (Experiment 1) and recognition (Experiment 3). The negative effect of generation on JOLs occurred for both aggregate and item-by-item JOLs, but in the latter case, the positive generation effect in actual memory performance was reduced or eliminated (as also occurs with visual generation tasks; Experiments 2 and 4). Furthermore, the decrease in perceptual fluency produced by the generation manipulation was correlated with the decrease in JOLs for this condition (Experiment 5). The negative effect of generation on JOLs persisted even when participants were warned that the generation condition produces equal or greater memory performance compared to the intact condition (Experiment 6). The results are in accord with the perceptual fluency hypothesis and show that this metamemory illusion is related to objective measures of perceptual difficulty. With regard to actual memory performance, this novel auditory generation manipulation produces results consistent with those produced in the visual modality.

The current study examined the degree to which predictions of memory performance made immediately or at a delay are sensitive to confidently held memory illusions. Participants studied unrelated pairs of words and made judgements of learning (JOLs) for each item, either immediately or after a delay. Half of the unrelated pairs (deceptive items; e.g., nurse–dollar) had a semantically related competitor (e.g., doctor) that was easily accessible when given a test cue (e.g., nurse–do_ _ _r) and half had no semantically related competitor (control items; e.g., subject–dollar). Following the study phase, participants were administered a cued recall test. Results from Experiment 1 showed that memory performance was less accurate for deceptive compared with control items. In addition, delaying judgement improved the relative accuracy of JOLs for control items but not for deceptive items. Subsequent experiments explored the degree to which the relative accuracy of delayed JOLs for deceptive items improved as a result of a warning to ensure that retrieved memories were accurate (Experiment 2) and corrective feedback regarding the veracity of information retrieved prior to making a JOL (Experiment 3). In all, these data suggest that delayed JOLs may be largely insensitive to memory errors unless participants are provided with feedback regarding memory accuracy.

Objective:Metacognition is defined as the ability to observe, monitor, and make judgments about one’s own cognitive status. Judgments of learning (JOLs) and retrospective confidence judgments (RCJs) are two elements of metacognition related to memory, or metamemory. JOLs refer to one’s assumptions of their memory performance prior to completing a memory task, while RCJs describe one’s subjective assessment of their memory performance after they have completed the task. Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is known to negatively impact general metacognitive functioning. However, the nuanced effects of TBI on constituent metacognitive subprocesses like JOLs and RCJs remain unclear. This study aimed to characterize patterns of brain activity that occur when individuals with TBI render JOLs and RCJs during a meta-memory task. Differences between JOL- and RCJ-related patterns of activation were also explored.Participants and Methods:20 participants with moderate-to-severe TBI completed a metacognition task while undergoing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Participants were first exposed to target slides with a set of polygons placed in specific locations, then asked to identify the target slides within a set of distractors. Before identifying the target slides, participants rated how well they believed they would remember the polygons’ shape and location (JOL). After answering, they rated how confident they were that the answer they provided was correct (RCJ). First-level time series analyses of fMRI data were conducted for each participant using FSL FEAT. Higher-level random effects modeling was then performed to assess average activation across all participants. Finally, contrasts were applied to examine and compare JOL- and RCJ-specific patterns of activation.Results:JOLs were associated with activation of the left frontal gyri, bilateral anterior cingulate, left insula, and right putamen (p < 0.01). RCJs were associated with activation of the bilateral frontal gyri, bilateral posterior and anterior cingulate, left insula, right putamen, and left thalamus (p < 0.01). Compared to RCJs, JOLs demonstrated greater left insula activation (p < 0.01). Compared to JOLs, RCJs demonstrated greater activation of the left superior frontal gyrus, bilateral middle frontal gyrus, and bilateral anterior cingulate (p < 0.01).Conclusions:The areas of activation found in this study were consistent with structures previously identified in the broader metacognition literature. Overall, RCJs produced activity in a greater number of regions that was more bilaterally distributed compared to JOLs. Moreover, several regions that were active during both metacognitive subprocesses tended to be even more active during RCJs. A hypothesis for this observation suggests that, unlike JOLs, the additional involvement of reflecting on one’s immediate memory of completing the task during RCJs may require greater recruitment of resources compared to JOLs. Importantly, these findings suggest that, while different metacognitive subprocesses may recruit similar brain circuitry, some subprocesses may require more potent and widespread activation of this circuitry than others. As such, subprocesses with greater activational needs and complexity, such as RCJs, may be more susceptible to damage caused by TBI. Future research should aim to compare patterns of activation associated with certain metacognitive subprocesses between survivors of TBI and healthy controls.

Several decades of research have examined predictions of future memory performance—typically referred to as judgments of learning (JOLs). In this chapter, I first discuss the early history of research on JOLs and their fit within a leading metacognitive framework. A common methodological approach has evolved that permits the researcher to investigate the correspondence between JOLs and memory performance, as well as the degree to which JOLs distinguish between information that is or is not remembered. Factors that influence each aspect of the accuracy of JOLs are noted and considered within theoretical approaches to JOLs. Thus far, research on JOLs had yielded a number of findings and promising theoretical frameworks that will continue to be refined. Future work will benefit by considering how learners combine information to arrive at a judgment, the implications of alternative methods of measuring JOLs, and the potential for JOLs to influence memory.

Generating errors followed by corrective feedback enhances retention more effectively than does reading-the benefit of errorful generation-but people tend to be unaware of this benefit. The current research explored this metacognitive unawareness, its effect on self-regulated learning, and how to alleviate or reverse it. People's beliefs about the relative learning efficacy of generating errors followed by corrective feedback compared to reading, and the effects of generation fluency, are also explored. In Experiments 1 and 2, lower judgments of learning (JOLs) were consistently given to incorrectly generated word pairs than to studied (read) pairs and led participants to distribute more study resources to incorrectly generated pairs, even though superior recall of these pairs was exhibited in the final test. In Experiment 3, a survey revealed that people believe that generating errors followed by corrective feedback is inferior to reading. Experiment 4 was designed to alter participants' metacognition by informing them of the errorful generation benefit prior to study. Although metacognitive misalignment was partly countered, participants still tended to be unaware of this benefit when making item-by-item JOLs. In Experiment 5, in a delayed JOL condition, higher JOLs were given to incorrectly generated pairs and read pairs were more likely to be selected for restudy. The current research reveals that people tend to underestimate the learning efficiency of generating errors followed by corrective feedback relative to reading when making immediate item-by-item JOLs. Informing people of the errorful generation benefit prior to study and asking them to make delayed JOLs are effective ways to alleviate this metacognitive miscalibration. (PsycINFO Database Record