Do different metamemory judgments tap the same underlying aspects of memory

We compared the predictions from several kinds of metamemory judgments (on the same set of items), both in terms of their predictive accuracy and in terms of the commonality of predictions. Undergraduates made judgments about the ease with which they could learn each item in a list (ease-of-learning judgments); then they learned every item, either to a minimal criterion of learning or with overlearning, and made judgments about how well they knew each item (judgments of knowing); finally, they returned 4 weeks later for a retention session and made feeling-of-knowing judgments on every time they could not recall, after which a recognition test assessed predictive accuracy. Ease-of-learning judgments had the least predictive accuracy. Surprisingly, however, the recognition of nonrecalled items was predicted equally well by judgments of knowing (made 4 weeks earlier) as by feeling-of-knowing judgments (made immediately prior to recognition). Moreover, those two kinds of judgments were only weakly correlated with each other, which implies that they do not tap memory in the same way.

[1]  Dana Quade,et al.  Nonparametric Partial Correlation , 1967 .

[2]  Gregg T. Vesonder,et al.  On the ability to predict one's own responses while learning , 1985 .

[3]  T. O. Nelson,et al.  A comparison of three predictors of an individual's memory performance: the individual's feeling of knowing versus the normative feeling of knowing versus base-rate item difficulty. , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[4]  J. Hart,et al.  Memory and the memory-monitoring process , 1967 .

[5]  T. O. Nelson,et al.  Overlearning and the Feeling of Knowing. , 1982 .

[6]  Gregg T. Vesonder,et al.  Knowledge of one's own responding and the relation of such knowledge to learning: A developmental study☆ , 1978 .

[7]  Eugene B. Zechmeister,et al.  Human memory, an introduction to research and theory , 1982 .

[8]  T. O. Nelson,et al.  The feeling of knowing for different types of retrieval failure. , 1985, Acta psychologica.

[9]  J. Richardson,et al.  Associative connection between paired verbal items. , 1958, Journal of experimental psychology.

[10]  T. O. Nelson,et al.  Cognition and metacognition at extreme altitudes on Mount Everest , 1990 .

[11]  Lola L. Cuddy,et al.  Discrimination of item strength at time of presentation , 1969 .

[12]  D. J. Bartholomew,et al.  Measurement in the Social Sciences: Theories and Strategies. , 1976 .

[13]  Eugene B. Zechmeister,et al.  Judgments of knowing: The influence of retrieval practice. , 1980 .

[14]  T. O. Nelson,et al.  A comparison of current measures of the accuracy of feeling-of-knowing predictions , 1984 .

[15]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory , 1980 .

[16]  E. Lovelace.  Metamemory: Monitoring Future Recallability During Study , 1984 .

[17]  T. O. Nelson.  Detecting small amounts of information in memory: Savings for nonrecognized items. , 1978 .

[18]  T. O. Nelson,et al.  Accuracy of Feeling-of-Knowing Judgments for Predicting Perceptual Identification and Relearning , 1984 .

[19]  B. Underwood.  Individual and group predictions of item difficulty for free learning. , 1966, Journal of experimental psychology.

[20]  T. O. Nelson,et al.  Postcriterion overlearning reduces the effectiveness of the method of adjusted learning , 1982 .

[21]  B. Kintz,et al.  Group predictions of item differences of CVC trigrams , 1968 .