Accuracy of Judgments of Learning for The Primary School Students with Different Recall Tasks

Studies of Psychology and Behavior ›› 2017, Vol. 15 ›› Issue (2): 223-226.

• CONTENTS • Previous Articles Next Articles

Accuracy of Judgments of Learning for The Primary School Students with Different Recall Tasks

Dai Jinghua, Jia Ning

Hebei University of Chinese Medicine，Shijiazhuang 050200;
College of Education, Hebei Normal University, Shijiazhuang 050024

Received:2015-09-21 Online:2017-04-24 Published:2017-03-20
Supported by:
河北省自然基金项目（C2014205127）。

不同回忆任务下小学生即时学习判断的准确性*

代景华 , 贾宁

河北中医学院，石家庄 050200;
河北师范大学教育学院，石家庄 050024

通讯作者: 贾宁，E-mail：jnajh@126.com。

Abstract

Abstract: Judgments of learning(JOLs)are assessments that people make about how well they learned particular information. The present study explored the accuracy of immediate JOLs. The 5th graders of primary school participated in the experiment, forward-pairs and backward-pairs were selected as experimental materials. The results showed that recall task and association directions affected the accuracy of the JOLs: 1)There was the foresight bias in the JOLs of cued recall task. 2)The JOLs of the two kinds of pairs were both overestimated in free recall task. According to the fluency hypothesis, the difference between encoding fluency and retrial fluency result in the bias of the JOLs accuracy.

Key words: the primary school students, recall task, judgment of learning, accuracy.

摘要： 学习判断是指对当前已经学习的项目在以后测验中成绩的预见性判断。本研究以小学五年级学生为被试，选取正向词对和反向词对为实验材料，考察不同回忆任务下小学生学习判断的准确性及偏差。研究发现，小学五年级学生的即时学习判断的准确性受到词对类型和回忆任务的影响：（1）小学生线索回忆任务下的学习判断中，正向词对的准确性较好，反向词对出现了高估，表现出了学习判断的预见偏差;（2）自由回忆任务下的学习判断中，两种词对都出现了显著的高估。研究结果丰富和细化了流畅性假说对学习判断加工机制的解释，并提出即时学习判断准确性的偏差是由于编码流畅性和提取流畅性的差异造成的。

关键词: 小学生, 回忆任务, 学习判断, 准确性

CLC Number:

B844.1

Dai Jinghua, Jia Ning. Accuracy of Judgments of Learning for The Primary School Students with Different Recall Tasks[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2017, 15(2): 223-226.

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.

References

[1] 贾宁, 白学军, 彭建国.(2011). 小学高年级学生学习判断的发展. 心理科学, 34(2), 402-406.
[2] 贾宁, 代景华.(2012). 小学高年级学生的学习判断绝对准确性及预见偏差. 心理发展与教育, 1, 54-60.
[3] 刘希平, 唐卫海, 方格.(2006). 儿童程序性元记忆的发展. 心理科学, 29(5), 1243-1246.
[4] 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, 55-68.
[5] Castel, A. D., McCabe, D. P., & Roediger, H. L.(2007). Illusions of competence and overestimation of associative memory for identical items: Evidence from judgments of learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(1), 107-111.
[6] Dunlosky, J., Mueller, M., & Tauber, S. K. (2014). The contribution of processing fluency(and beliefs)to people′s judgments of learning. Remembering: Attributions, processes, and control in human memory: Papers in Honour of Larry L. Jacoby, 46-64.
[7] Finn, B., & Tauber, S. K.(2015). When Confidence Is Not a Signal of Knowing: How Students′ Experiences and Beliefs About Processing Fluency Can Lead to Miscalibrated Confidence. Educational Psychology Review, 1-20.
[8] Hertzog, C., Dunlosky, J., Robinson, A. E., & Kidder, D.(2003). Encoding fluency is a cue used for judgments about learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29(1), 22-34.
[9] 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.
[10] 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 and Cognition, 34(5), 959-972.
[11] 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.
[12] Koriat, A., & Ma′ Ayan, H.(2005). The effects of encoding fluency and retrieval fluency on judgments of learning. Journal of Memory and Language, 52(4), 478-492.
[13] Matvey, G., Dunlosky, J., & Guttentag, R.(2001). Fluency of retrieval at study affects judgments of learning(JOLs): An analytic or nonanalytic basis for JOLs? Memory and Cognition, 29, 222-233.
[14] Mueller, M. L., Tauber, S. K., & Dunlosky, J.(2013). Contributions of beliefs and processing fluency to the effect of relatedness on judgments of learning. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 20(2), 378-384.
[15] Narens, L., Jameson, K. A., & Lee, V. A.(1994). Subthreshold priming and memory monitoring. In J. Metcalfe & R Shimamura(Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing. Cambridge, MA: MfT Press, 71-92.
[16] Thompson, V. A., Turner, J. A. P., Pennycook, G., Ball, L. J., Brack, H., Ophir, Y., & Ackerman, R.(2013). The role of answer fluency and perceptual fluency as metacognitive cues for initiating analytic thinking. Cognition, 128(2), 237-251.
[17] Tiede, H. L., & Leboe, J. P.(2009). Illusions of Competence for Phonetically, Orthographically, and Semantically Similar Word Pairs. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(4), 294-302.

Accuracy of Judgments of Learning for The Primary School Students with Different Recall Tasks

不同回忆任务下小学生即时学习判断的准确性*

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 4

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	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.
[2]	Chen Gongxiang, Qiao Fuqiang, Zhao Jia. The Influence of Retention Interval and Cue Types on Judgments of Forgetting [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2016, 14(4): 433-437.
[3]	Zhang Jinkun,Bai Xuejun,Lian Rong. THE ACCURACY OF MEMORY MONITORING AND CONTROL AND WHAT IT MEANS TO EFFECTIVE MEMORY [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2009, 7(4): 284-288.
[4]	Han Zongyi, Bai Xuejun. MOVEMENT ERROR AND REPETITION ERROR MADE BY PRIMARY SCHOOL STUDENTS IN SERIAL RECALL TASK [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2005, 3(4): 281-285.