No abstract

Two experiments are reported in which we used type-2 signal detection theory to separate the effects of semantic categorization on early-and late-selection processes in free and cued recall. In Experiment 1, participants studied cue-target pairs for which the targets belonged to two, six, or 24 semantic categories, and later the participants were required to recall the targets either with (cued recall) or without (free recall) the studied cues. A confidence rating and a report decision were also required, so that we could compute both forced-report quantity and metacognitive resolution (type-2 discrimination), which served as our estimates of early-and late-selection processes, respectively. Consistent with prior research, having fewer categories enhanced the early-selection process (in performance, two > six > 24 categories). However, in contrast, the late-selection process was impaired (24 > six = two categories). In Experiment 2, encoding of paired associates, for which the targets belonged to either two or 20 semantic categories, was manipulated by having participants either form interactive images or engage in rote repetition. Having fewer categories again was associated with enhanced early selection (two > 20 categories); this effect was greater for rote repetition than for interactive imagery, and greater for free recall than for cued recall. However, late selection again showed the opposite pattern (20 > two categories), even with interactive-imagery encoding, which formed distinctive, individuated memory traces. The results are discussed in terms of early-and late-selection processes in retrieval, as well as overt versus covert recognition.Keywords Recall . Recognition . Metamemory . Categorization . Type 2 signal detection theory It has been well documented that semantic or categorical relatedness between study items (e.g., study lists composed of exemplars from semantic categories) has a facilitative effect on recall, as compared to no relationship between

This study investigated how well students differentiate their responses' accuracies (metacognitive monitoring) and estimate their test scores beyond counting—and counting on—the number of correct responses alone. Monitoring abilities of 2832 sixth‐graders (1410 male and 1422 female native in Turkish) at an 11‐item Program for International Student Assessment (PISA)‐equivalent mathematics test were measured via response‐contingent Type‐2 signal detection theory. The students also made score estimations right before and immediately after completing the test (pre‐ and posttest estimations, respectively). Although high‐scoring students underestimated and low‐scoring ones overestimated how they would perform in the test, high‐scorers were accurate in their posttest estimations unlike the low‐scoring group, where the lattaer retained their overestimation tendencies. Having better monitoring performance, the high‐scoring group could subsequently calibrate their posttest estimations. Additional assessment methods such as measuring monitoring and score estimations seem to have the potential to reveal how mathematics students behave before, during, and after responding.

No abstract

No abstract