Recent research shows that asking learners to make immediate judgments of learning (JOLs) during learning can improve their later memory performance for word pairs, words, and images. Whereas this so-...

Memory & Cognition is a forum for rigorous peer-reviewed research focusing on human memory and learning, broadly defined. An official journal of The ...

Large Language Models (LLMs) are transforming research practices in Information Systems (IS), offering new opportunities for qualitative data analysis. While recent studies show that LLM-assisted codi...

In metamemory research it is commonly assumed that learners spontaneously monitor their learning progress. To assess monitoring, participants are asked to provide judgments of learning (JOLs) while memorizing information, usually on a percentage scale. Recent evidence that providing JOLs has a reactive effect on memory performance, however, suggests that the processes involved when participants are requested to provide JOLs in experiments are different from those that otherwise occur. The present research examined whether the experimental requirement to report JOLs, rather than the requirement to assess learning, triggers the differential processing which ultimately results in JOL reactivity. Two hypotheses were examined. According to the overt-response hypothesis, JOL reactivity emerges solely from the requirement to report internal assessments that are otherwise done covertly. To test this hypothesis, participants studied related and unrelated word pairs and made JOLs either overtly, covertly, or not at all. According to the numerical-response hypothesis, JOL reactivity emerges from the requirement to translate qualitative, non-numerical internal assessments of learning into numerical responses. To test this hypothesis, participants made overt JOLs on a percentage scale, a Likert scale, a yes/no scale, or did not make JOLs. The results yielded JOL reactivity across all response formats (Experiment 2) and response scales (Experiment 3), except when participants were under-engaged in making covert JOLs (Experiments 1a, 1b, and 1c). These findings are inconsistent with both hypotheses and suggest instead that JOL reactivity emerges from the requirement to assess learning. Implications for the nature and occurrence of spontaneous monitoring are discussed.

Metacognitive judgments and decisions involve uncertainty and rely on probabilistic cues. Prior research shows that people integrate multiple cues when making judgments of learning (JOLs). The present study examined whether metacognitive control decisions are influenced by multiple cues as well. In each of two experiments, participants studied 60 words varying on two cues (Experiment 1: concreteness, emotionality; Experiment 2: font format, word frequency). In Experiment 1, all participants made restudy choices to maximize later recall, whereas in Experiment 2, half made restudy choices, and the other half provided JOLs. Participants who made restudy choices restudied their selected items, and all participants completed a recall test at the end of the experiment. At the group level, both cues influenced restudy choices in Experiment 1, but only one cue did so in Experiment 2. Individual-level analyses of Experiment 2 revealed that most participants used both cues, yet the direction of cue use differed across participants: Some participants more often selected items with cue values associated with lower JOLs, whereas others more often selected items with cue values associated with higher JOLs. Overall, effect sizes for cue effects on restudy choices were smaller than those for JOLs. These findings suggest that multiple cues guided metacognitive control decisions, but that cue integration and cue use were weaker and varied more across individuals than in metacognitive judgments. This pattern indicates that the alignment between monitoring and control is reduced by other factors influencing restudy choices.

One of the most important gerontological data sets has been opened to the research community. The data of the Berlin Aging Study (BASE) are accessible via the Research Data Center of the Leibniz Insti...