Do Beliefs About Font Size Affect Retrospective Metamemory Judgments in Addition to Prospective Judgments?

IF 1.1 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Experimental psychology Pub Date : 2022-05-01 Epub Date: 2022-08-17 DOI:10.1027/1618-3169/a000549
Karlos Luna, Pedro B Albuquerque
{"title":"Do Beliefs About Font Size Affect Retrospective Metamemory Judgments in Addition to Prospective Judgments?","authors":"Karlos Luna,&nbsp;Pedro B Albuquerque","doi":"10.1027/1618-3169/a000549","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b></b> Beliefs about how memory works explain several effects on prospective metamemory judgments (e.g., the effect of font size on judgments of learning; JOLs). Less is known about the effect of beliefs on retrospective judgments (i.e., confidence). Here, we tested whether font size also affects confidence ratings and whether beliefs play a similar role in confidence than in JOLs. In two experiments, participants studied words in small and large size, rated JOLs, and completed a font-size test in which they indicated the font size at study and a standard old/new recognition test. The results confirmed that font size affected both JOLs and confidence ratings. The presentation of the counter-belief that memory is better for words in small font size in Experiment 2 and the analyses of confidence for participants who did not believe that large fonts improved memory suggested that the effect of font size on confidence was based on beliefs. This research shows that the debate on theory-based and experience-based factors should not be limited to prospective metamemory judgments but also encompass retrospective judgments.</p>","PeriodicalId":12173,"journal":{"name":"Experimental psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experimental psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000549","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/8/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Beliefs about how memory works explain several effects on prospective metamemory judgments (e.g., the effect of font size on judgments of learning; JOLs). Less is known about the effect of beliefs on retrospective judgments (i.e., confidence). Here, we tested whether font size also affects confidence ratings and whether beliefs play a similar role in confidence than in JOLs. In two experiments, participants studied words in small and large size, rated JOLs, and completed a font-size test in which they indicated the font size at study and a standard old/new recognition test. The results confirmed that font size affected both JOLs and confidence ratings. The presentation of the counter-belief that memory is better for words in small font size in Experiment 2 and the analyses of confidence for participants who did not believe that large fonts improved memory suggested that the effect of font size on confidence was based on beliefs. This research shows that the debate on theory-based and experience-based factors should not be limited to prospective metamemory judgments but also encompass retrospective judgments.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
除了前瞻判断外,关于字体大小的信念是否影响回顾性元记忆判断?
关于记忆如何工作的信念解释了前瞻元记忆判断的几种影响(例如,字体大小对学习判断的影响;约尔)。人们对信念对回溯性判断(即信心)的影响知之甚少。在这里,我们测试了字体大小是否也会影响信心评级,以及信念在信心中的作用是否与joll相似。在两个实验中,参与者学习了大小字体的单词,对JOLs进行了评分,并完成了一个字体大小测试,在测试中他们指出了研究中的字体大小和一个标准的新旧识别测试。结果证实,字体大小对joll和信心评级都有影响。实验2中出现的“小字体记忆效果更好”的反信念,以及对不相信大字体记忆效果的参与者的信心分析表明,字体大小对信心的影响是基于信念的。本研究表明,关于理论因素和经验因素的争论不应局限于前瞻性元记忆判断,而应包括回顾性判断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Experimental psychology
Experimental psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
7.70%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: As its name implies, Experimental Psychology (ISSN 1618-3169) publishes innovative, original, high-quality experimental research in psychology — quickly! It aims to provide a particularly fast outlet for such research, relying heavily on electronic exchange of information which begins with the electronic submission of manuscripts, and continues throughout the entire review and production process. The scope of the journal is defined by the experimental method, and so papers based on experiments from all areas of psychology are published. In addition to research articles, Experimental Psychology includes occasional theoretical and review articles.
期刊最新文献
Production and Preschoolers: Is There a Benefit and Do They Know? The Interaction Between the Production Effect and Serial Position in Recognition and Recall. The Role of Stimulus Uncertainty and Curiosity in Attention Control. Correction to Bozkurt et al., 2023. Justifying Responses Affects the Relationship Between Confidence and Accuracy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1