Judgments of learning and improvement

Can learners accurately judge the rate of their learning? Rates of learning may be informative when study time is allocated across materials, and students' judgments of their learning rate have been proposed as a possible metacognitive tool. Participants estimated how much they improved between presentations in multitrial learning situations in which n-gram paragraphs (in Experiments 1 and 2) or word pairs (Experiments 3 and 4) were learned . In the first experiment, participants rated improvement on a percentage scale, whereas on the second and third, judgments were given on a 0–6 scale. Experiment 4 used both a percentage scale and an absolute number scale. The main result was that judgments of improvement were poorly correlated with actual improvement and, in one case, were negatively correlated. Although judgments of improvement were correlated with changes in judgments of learning, they were not reliable indicators of actual improvement. Implications are discussed for theoretical work on metacognition.

[1]  E. Heit,et al.  Metacognitive Judgments of Improvement are Uncorrelated with Learning Rate. , 2010 .

[2]  A. Koriat,et al.  Comparing objective and subjective learning curves: judgments of learning exhibit increased underconfidence with practice. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[3]  L. Reder,et al.  Metacognition does not imply awareness: Strategy choice is governed by implicit learning and memory , 1996 .

[4]  J. Dunlosky,et al.  Norms of paired-associate recall during multitrial learning of Swahili-English translation equivalents. , 1994, Memory.

[5]  John Dunlosky,et al.  Causes and constraints of the shift-to-easier-materials effect in the control of study , 2004, Memory & cognition.

[6]  J. Metcalfe,et al.  Evidence that judgments of learning are causally related to study choice , 2008, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[7]  Nate Kornell,et al.  Optimising self-regulated study: The benefits—and costs—of dropping flashcards , 2008, Memory.

[8]  Nate Kornell,et al.  Study efficacy and the region of proximal learning framework. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[9]  David J. Therriault,et al.  Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. , 2003 .

[10]  Janet Metcalfe,et al.  Judgments of Learning are Influenced by Memory for Past Test. , 2008, Journal of memory and language.

[11]  Linda Bol,et al.  Test prediction and performance in a classroom context. , 2000 .

[12]  Gregory Schraw.  A conceptual analysis of five measures of metacognitive monitoring , 2009 .

[13]  A. Koriat,et al.  Monitoring and control processes in the strategic regulation of memory accuracy. , 1996, Psychological review.

[14]  John Dunlosky,et al.  Utilization of Metacognitive Judgments in the Allocation of Study During Multitrial Learning , 1994 .

[15]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[16]  John Dunlosky,et al.  Empirical analysis of the intrinsic–extrinsic distinction of judgments of learning (JOLs): Effects of relatedness and serial position on JOLs. , 2001 .

[17]  J. Metcalfe,et al.  A Region of Proximal Learning Model of Study Time Allocation Journal of Memory and Language , 2005 .

[18]  C. Carver,et al.  Origins and Functions of Positive and Negative Affect: A Control-Process View. , 1990 .

[19]  John Dunlosky,et al.  Toward a general model of self-regulated study: An analysis of selection of items for study and self-paced study time. , 1999 .

[20]  J. Dunlosky,et al.  The effects of categorical relatedness on judgements of learning (JOLs) , 2006, Memory.

[21]  A. Koriat.  Monitoring one's own knowledge during study : A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning , 1997 .

[22]  Helen Moss,et al.  Birkbeck Word Association Norms , 1996 .

[23]  J. Dunlosky,et al.  Empirical analysis of the intrinsic-extrinsic distinction of judgments of learning (JOLs): effects of relatedness and serial position on JOLs. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[24]  T. O. Nelson,et al.  When People's Judgments of Learning (JOLs) are Extremely Accurate at Predicting Subsequent Recall: The “Delayed-JOL Effect” , 1991 .

[25]  Rajiv Sethi,et al.  Metacognitive Control and Optimal Learning , 2006, Cogn. Sci..

[26]  R. Catrambone,et al.  Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society , 2010 .

[27]  Robert A. Bjork,et al.  The promise and perils of self-regulated study , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[28]  T. O. Nelson,et al.  Multiple study trials and judgments of learning. , 2003, Acta psychologica.

[29]  L. Reder.  Implicit memory and metacognition , 1996 .

[30]  Nate Kornell,et al.  The dynamics of learning and allocation of study time to a region of proximal learning. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[31]  J. Dunlosky,et al.  Metacomprehension A Brief History and How to Improve Its Accuracy , 2007 .