{"title":"Integrating multiple cues in metamemory: using the illusory effect of font size and level of processing to inform FOK judgments","authors":"","doi":"10.1007/s11409-023-09367-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Abstract</h3> <p>Metamemory judgments, defined as predictions of memory performance, are often influenced by misleading cues, such as fluency. However, how fluency cues compete to influence retrospective metamemory judgments is still unclear. The present study investigated how multiple fluency cues concurrently influence immediate feeling of knowing (FOK) judgments with two fluency manipulations—font size (large vs. small font size) as a perceptual cue and level of processing (deep vs. shallow processing) as a conceptual cue. In Experiment 1, participants studied large or small unrelated word pairs and were either directed to process the conceptual aspects of each word pair (deep) or to focus on the perceptual aspects of the word pairs (shallow). Then participants were presented with a cued recall test and asked to make an FOK judgment. Lastly, participants received a five alternative- forced-choice recognition test. Experiment 2 was similar except the deep condition was replaced with a no-processing (no instruction) condition. Results revealed that perceptual fluency (large font size) influenced FOK judgments only when word pairs were processed in the shallow condition in both experiments compared to no-processing condition. This interaction of multiple cues suggests that, participants rely on information which is easily accessible to them (perceptual fluency) for FOK judgements in presence of certain secondary cues despite those cues being less diagnostic of future memory performance. These new insights inform how people integrate different sources of information in metamemory decisions and have broad implications for settings including academic learning and everyday decision making.</p>","PeriodicalId":47385,"journal":{"name":"Metacognition and Learning","volume":"84 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Metacognition and Learning","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-023-09367-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Metamemory judgments, defined as predictions of memory performance, are often influenced by misleading cues, such as fluency. However, how fluency cues compete to influence retrospective metamemory judgments is still unclear. The present study investigated how multiple fluency cues concurrently influence immediate feeling of knowing (FOK) judgments with two fluency manipulations—font size (large vs. small font size) as a perceptual cue and level of processing (deep vs. shallow processing) as a conceptual cue. In Experiment 1, participants studied large or small unrelated word pairs and were either directed to process the conceptual aspects of each word pair (deep) or to focus on the perceptual aspects of the word pairs (shallow). Then participants were presented with a cued recall test and asked to make an FOK judgment. Lastly, participants received a five alternative- forced-choice recognition test. Experiment 2 was similar except the deep condition was replaced with a no-processing (no instruction) condition. Results revealed that perceptual fluency (large font size) influenced FOK judgments only when word pairs were processed in the shallow condition in both experiments compared to no-processing condition. This interaction of multiple cues suggests that, participants rely on information which is easily accessible to them (perceptual fluency) for FOK judgements in presence of certain secondary cues despite those cues being less diagnostic of future memory performance. These new insights inform how people integrate different sources of information in metamemory decisions and have broad implications for settings including academic learning and everyday decision making.
期刊介绍：
The journal "Metacognition and Learning" addresses various components of metacognition, such as metacognitive awareness, experiences, knowledge, and executive skills.
Both general metacognition as well as domain-specific metacognitions in various task domains (mathematics, physics, reading, writing etc.) are considered. Papers may address fundamental theoretical issues, measurement issues regarding both quantitative and qualitative methods, as well as empirical studies about individual differences in metacognition, relations with other learner characteristics and learning strategies, developmental issues, the training of metacognition components in learning, and the teacher’s role in metacognition training. Studies highlighting the role of metacognition in self- or co-regulated learning as well as its relations with motivation and affect are also welcomed.
Submitted papers are judged on theoretical relevance, methodological thoroughness, and appeal to an international audience. The journal aims for a high academic standard with relevance to the field of educational practices.
One restriction is that papers should pertain to the role of metacognition in learning situations. Self-regulation in clinical settings, such as coping with phobia or anxiety outside learning situations, is beyond the scope of the journal.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
