学习判断的框架效应： 加工流畅性的影响

心理与行为研究 ›› 2019, Vol. 17 ›› Issue (6): 729-735.

学习判断的框架效应：加工流畅性的影响

贾宁¹, 魏琳^1,2, 代景华³

1. 河北师范大学教育学院, 石家庄 050024;
2. 天津体育学院, 天津 301617;
3. 河北中医学院, 石家庄 050200

收稿日期:2018-06-06 出版日期:2019-11-20 发布日期:2020-01-13
通讯作者: 代景华,E-mail:daijinghuapsy@163.com
基金资助:
河北省教育厅科学技术研究项目（QN2018152）

Framing Effects in Judgments of Learning: The Role of Processing Fluency

JIA Ning¹, WEI Lin^1,2, DAI Jinghua³

1. College of Education, Hebei Normal University, Shijiazhuang 050024;
2. Tianjin University of Sport, Tianjin 301617;
3. Hebei University of Chinese Medicine, Shijiazuang 050200

Received:2018-06-06 Online:2019-11-20 Published:2020-01-13

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 研究旨在考察学习判断中的框架效应以及加工流畅性的影响。采用逐项即时学习判断任务，通过操纵指导语来设置正向框架和负性框架。其中，实验1和实验2分别考察低、高相关词对学习任务中学习判断的框架效应。实验3深入探究了提取流畅性对学习判断框架效应的影响。研究结果显示：第一，在高加工流畅性词对的学习判断上出现了框架效应；第二，提取流畅性不影响学习判断的框架效应。研究支持了消极心理锚点假说，并推测编码流畅性是产生框架效应的主要因素。

关键词: 学习判断, 框架效应, 加工流畅性

Abstract: In the current study, three experiments explored the framing effects in judgments of learning (JOLs) and the effect of the processing fluency on it. In the experiments, participants made forget-framed JOLs or remember-framed JOLs for each paired-words. Experiments 1 and 2 focused on the effect of the different levels of processing fluency on the framing effect in JOLs. Experiment 3 investigated the influence of retrieval fluency on the framing effect in JOLs. Results of the three experiments showed: Firstly, the framing effects appeared when participants studied the paired-words with high-level processing fluency. Secondly, retrieval fluency does not influence on the framing effects in JOLs. The study supports the pessimistic-anchoring hypothesis, and the findings suggest that encoding fluency plays an important role in the framing effects in JOLs.

Key words: judgment of learning, framing effects, processing fluency

中图分类号:

B842

贾宁, 魏琳, 代景华. 学习判断的框架效应：加工流畅性的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17(6): 729-735.

JIA Ning, WEI Lin, DAI Jinghua. Framing Effects in Judgments of Learning: The Role of Processing Fluency[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2019, 17(6): 729-735.

参考文献

代景华, 贾宁. (2017). 不同回忆任务下小学生即时学习判断的准确性. 心理与行为研究, 15(2), 223-226, doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672-0628.2017.02.012
贾宁, 李聪慧, 代景华. (2018). 高中生元记忆监测准确性及其对学习时间分配的影响. 应用心理学, 24(1), 33-40, doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-6020.2018.01.004
贾宁, 张欣. (2014). 练习伴随低估效应的产生机制. 应用心理学, 20(2), 138-145
张旭锦. (2010). 知觉流畅性对判断和决策的影响. 心理科学进展, 18(4), 639-645
Benjamin, A. S., Bjork, R. A., & Schwartz, B. L. (1998). The mismeasure of memory:When retrieval fluency is misleading as a metamnemonic index. Journal of Experimental Psychology:General, 127(1), 55-68, doi:10.1037/0096-3445.127.1.55.
Dimov, C. M., & Link, D. (2017). Do people order cues by retrieval fluency when making probabilistic inferences? Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 30(4), 843-854, doi:10.1002/bdm.2002.
Finn, B. (2008). Framing effects on metacognitive monitoring and control. Memory & Cognition, 36(4), 813-821.
Koriat, A., & Bjork, R. A. (2005). Illusions of competence in monitoring one's knowledge during study. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(2), 187-194, doi:10.1037/0278-7393.31.2.187.
Koriat, A., & Bjork, R. A. (2006a). Illusions of competence during study can be remedied by manipulations that enhance learners' sensitivity to retrieval conditions at test. Memory & Cognition, 34(5), 959-972.
Koriat, A., & Bjork, R. A. (2006b). Mending metacognitive illusions:A comparison of mnemonic-based and theory-based procedures. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32(5), 1133-1145, doi:10.1037/0278-7393.32.5.1133.
Koriat, A., Bjork, R. A., Sheffer, L., & Bar, S. K. (2004). Predicting one's own forgetting:The role of experience-based and theory-based processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology:General, 133(4), 643-656, doi:10.1037/0096-3445.133.4.643.
Kornell, N., & Bjork, R. A. (2009). A stability bias in human memory:Overestimating remembering and underestimating learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology:General, 138(4), 449-468, doi:10.1037/a0017350.
Kühberger, A. (1997). Theoretical conceptions of framing effects in risky decisions. In R. Crozier, R. Ranyard, & O. Svenson (Eds.), Decision making:Cognitive models and explanations (pp. 128-144). New York:Routledge.
Lanska, M., & Westerman, D. (2018). Transfer appropriate fluency:Encoding and retrieval interactions in fluency-based memory illusions. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 44(7), 1001-1012, doi:10.1037/xlm0000496.
Levin, I. P., Gaeth, G. J., Schreiber, J., & Lauriola, M. (2002). A new look at framing effects:Distribution of effect sizes, individual differences, and independence of types of effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88(1), 411-429, doi:10.1006/obhd.2001.2983.
Lloyd, M. E., Hartman, A., Ngo, C. T., Ruser, N., Westerman, D. L., & Miller, J. K. (2015). Not enough familiarity for fluency:Definitional encoding increases familiarity but does not lead to fluency attribution in associative recognition. Memory & Cognition, 43(1), 39-48.
Nelson, T. O., Dunlosky, J., Graf, A., & Narens, L. (1994). Utilization of metacognitive judgments in the allocation of study during multitrial learning. Psychological Science, 5(4), 207-213, doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1994.tb00502.x.
Oppenheimer, D. M. (2008). The secret life of fluency. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(6), 237-241, doi:10.1016/j.tics.2008.02.014.
Rhodes, M. G., & Castel, A. D. (2008). Memory predictions are influenced by perceptual information:Evidence for metacognitive illusions. Journal of Experimental Psychology:General, 137(4), 615-625, doi:10.1037/a0013684.
Rosenstreich, E., & Goshen-Gottstein, Y. (2015). Recollection-based retrieval is influenced by contextual variation at encoding but not at retrieval. PLoS One, 10(7), e0130403, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0130403.
Rummer, R., Schweppe, J., & Schwede, A. (2016). Fortune is fickle:Null-effects of disfluency on learning outcomes. Metacognition and Learning, 11(1), 57-70, doi:10.1007/s11409-015-9151-5.
Serra, M. J., & England, B. D. (2012). Magnitude and accuracy differences between judgements of remembering and forgetting. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(11), 2231-2257, doi:10.1080/17470218.2012.685081.
Undorf, M., & Erdfelder, E. (2013). Separation of encoding fluency and item difficulty effects on judgements of learning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66(10), 2060-2072, doi:10.1080/17470218.2013.777751.

[1]	徐慧, 李美佳, 彭华茂. 眼睛注视线索对经济领域风险决策的影响：基于框架效应范式[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2022, 20(1): 37-44.
[2]	任亚萍, 孙岩, 赵雪松. 不同任务框架下自我损耗对自我-他人风险决策的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(6): 750-756.
[3]	段锦云, 徐悦, 任小云, 吴俏敏. 语境交流导向与建议方式对建议采纳的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2020, 18(2): 261-267.
[4]	张聚媛, 许潇, 刘勤学. 信息框架及个体情绪诱发对大学生捐助行为的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2019, 17(3): 360-367.
[5]	刘耀中, 刘敏, 彭滨. 任务框架和社会距离对风险决策的影响：来自ERP的证据[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2018, 16(1): 13-21.
[6]	代景华,贾宁. 不同回忆任务下小学生即时学习判断的准确性*[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2017, 15(2): 223-226.
[7]	陈功香, 乔福强, 赵佳. 延时间隔和线索类型对遗忘学习判断的影响*[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2016, 14(4): 433-437.
[8]	陈剑梅,傅琦. 劝捐策略和框架效应对个体捐赠决策的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2016, 14(3): 377-383.
[9]	王青春；阴国恩；李帅. 不同乐观水平大学生的框架效应研究[J]. , 2012, 10(3): 190-195.
[10]	王青春；阴国恩；张善霞；姚姝君. 青少年决策中的风险选择框架效应[J]. , 2011, 9(4): 268-272.
[11]	段锦云,王重鸣. 创业风险决策框架效应特征研究[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2010, 8(2): 106-112.
[12]	张锦坤,白学军,连榕. 记忆监控的准确性与有效记忆[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2009, 7(4): 284-288.
[13]	陈世平,张艳. 风险偏好与框架效应对大学生职业决策的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2009, 7(3): 183-187.
[14]	杨莲清莫雷王瑞明. 主体因素对学习判断孤立效应的影响[J]. , 2007, 5(3): 194-198.