Measurement of Relative Metamnemonic Accuracy

Benjamin, Aaron S.; Diaz, Michael

doi:10.4324/9780203805503.ch5

Cited by 67 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Instead, we present a relative measure of accuracy: the gamma correlations between predictions and performance (cf. Benjamin & Diaz, 2008). The gamma correlations between JOLs and final memory performance for the words studied only once were high and did not differ between young and older learners (G 0 .76 and .85, respectively), t(54) 0 0.85, d 0 0.16.…”

Section: Metacognitive Judgments and Item Selectionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Consequences of restudy choices in younger and older learners

Tullis

Benjamin

2012

Psychon Bull Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Allowing young learners to exert metacognitive control over learning often improves memory performance; however, little research has examined the consequences of giving older adults control over learning. In this study, younger and older adults studied word pairs before choosing half of the word pairs for restudy. Learners either restudied the items they chose (in the honor condition) or the items they did not choose (the dishonor condition; Kornell & Metcalfe, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 32:609-622, 2006). Older and younger learners chose the same types of items for restudy, but the effectiveness of these choices differed greatly by age. For young learners, memory was superior in the honor condition, but older learners actually revealed numerically higher performance in the dishonor condition. This reveals a dramatic failure of metacognitive control, in the absence of any obvious monitoring deficit, in older adults. Implications for models of self-regulated learning are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Metacognitive Judgments and Item Selectionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Consequences of restudy choices in younger and older learners

Tullis

Benjamin

2012

Psychon Bull Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The top half of Table 2 Metamnemonic resolution (i.e., the degree to which an individual could predict which particular items were more or less likely to be recalled) was computed using the signaldetection-based d a measure (Benjamin & Diaz, 2008;Green & Swets, 1966;Masson & Rotello, 2009), and is also displayed in Table 2. When applied to metamnemonic accuracy, d a is essentially a measure of the degree to which participants can discriminate, at the time of the JOL, between items that will later be remembered and items that will later be forgotten.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influences of valence and arousal on judgments of learning and on recall

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Much is known about how the emotional content of words affects memory for those words, but only recently have researchers begun to investigate whether emotional content influences metamemory-that is, learners' assessments of what is or is not memorable. The present study replicated recent work demonstrating that judgments of learning (JOLs) do indeed reflect the superior memorability of words with emotional content. We further contrasted two hypotheses regarding this effect: a physiological account in which emotional words are judged to be more memorable because of their arousing properties, versus a cognitive account in which emotional words are judged to be more memorable because of their cognitive distinctiveness. Two results supported the latter account. First, both normed arousal (Exp. 1) and normed valence (Exp. 2) independently influenced JOLs, even though only an effect of arousal would be expected under a physiological account. Second, emotional content no longer influenced JOLs in a design (Exp. 3) that reduced the primary distinctiveness of emotional words by using a single list of words in which normed valence and arousal were varied continuously. These results suggest that the metamnemonic benefit of emotional words likely stems from cognitive factors.Keywords Emotion . Metamemory . RecallEmotion is a fundamental aspect of the human experience, and understanding how emotion influences our cognitive processes is an essential component of understanding cognition in general (Mandler, 1975). Emotional effects on memory could include memory for an emotional event, memory for neutral stimuli encountered while in an emotional state, and memory for emotional content encountered in a neutral state. Here, we consider the lattermost of these scenarios: how the emotional content of material encountered in an otherwise neutral state influences subsequent memory and metamemory.We frequently encounter situations in which we learn and remember emotional information, such as when we read a news article recounting a natural disaster or celebration, or when we encounter emotionally evocative literature. Generally, emotional information is remembered better than neutral information (see Kensinger, 2009;Levine & Edelstein, 2009, for reviews); this has been observed with both pictures (e.g., Bradley, Greenwald, Petry, & Lang, 1992) and words (e.g., Kensinger & Corkin, 2003). In the present study, we examined whether and how emotion influences our predictions of future recall, and what these findings imply about the processes by which emotion influences memory and metamemory. Metamemory for emotional informationDespite the vast amount of research examining memory for emotional information, relatively little research has focused on how metamemory (i.e., the monitoring and control of memory) is influenced by emotion. Some general evidence (Tauber & Dunlosky, 2012;Zimmerman & Kelley, 2010) Mem Cogn (2017) 45:121-136 DOI 10.3758/s13421-016-0646-3 below, suggests that learners' predictions of recall can be sensit...

show abstract

“…Furthermore, gamma is unaffected by the overall performance on the items and the magnitude of the metacognitive judgments (Nelson, 1984). A recent Monte Carlo study (Benjamin & Diaz, 2008) showed that d a from signal detection theory is an equivalent or even a better measure of relative accuracy than is gamma.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%