Memory predictions are influenced by perceptual information: Evidence for metacognitive illusions.

Abstract

Although perceptual information is utilized to judge size or depth, little work has investigated whether such information is used to make memory predictions. The present study examined how the font size of to-be-remembered words influences predicted memory performance. Participants studied words for a freerecall test that varied in font size and made judgments of learning (JOLs) for each item. JOLs were influenced by font size, as larger font sizes were given higher JOLs, whereas little relationship was evident between font size and recall. The effect was modified when other, more valid, sources of information (e.g., associative strength) were available when JOLs were made and persisted despite experience with multiple study-test sessions, use of a forgetting scale to assess predictions, and explicit warning of participants that font size has little effect on memory performance. When ease of reading was manipulated, such that large font size words were made less fluent, the effect was eliminated. Thus, highly accessible perceptual cues can strongly influence JOLs, likely via encoding fluency, and this effect can lead to metacognitive illusions.

The effects of interleaving versus blocking on foreign language pronunciation learning

“…Seeing and hearing the pronunciation rules in blocked fashion may have rendered them easier to notice than seeing and hearing them in interleaved fashion. In previous studies, participants have reported that they learned material better when it was presented in a fashion that was designed to increase its ease or fluency of encoding, such as increasing the font size of text (e.g., Rhodes & Castel, 2008), increasing the coherency of text (e.g., Rawson & Dunlosky, 2002), or providing pictures with text (e.g., Carpenter & Olson, 2012;Serra & Dunlosky, 2010).…”

Effects of disfluency on cognitive and metacognitive processes and outcomes

“…It comprises studies on disfluency besides and within this special issue. In this review, most of the studies manipulated the perceptual fluency of written text by using fonts that are either easy or harder to read (e.g., Diemand-Yauman et al 2011), by printing text in either bigger or smaller fonts (e.g., Rhodes and Castel 2008), or by presenting text in either a clear or a distorted or blurred manner (e.g., Eitel et al 2014;Yue et al 2013). However, it is important to note that this is not a comprehensive review of disfluency research, but rather serves as an introduction to frame and motivate the studies of this special issue (summarized in Table 1).…”

“…serving as the fluent condition, and words printed in Arial 18 pt. serving as the disfluent condition (font size effect; e.g., Rhodes and Castel 2008). This font size effect is usually investigated by presenting the different font sizes to university students in a withinsubjects design (e.g., Kornell et al 2011;Mueller et al 2014;Rhodes and Castel 2008;Susser et al 2013;Exp.…”

When will bigger be (recalled) better? The influence of category size on JOLs depends on test format

“…Generally speaking, JOLs are much less sensitive to extrinsic cues than to intrinsic cues. For example, participants will provide a similar JOL for a 1-week retention interval as they will for a 1-day retention interval (Koriat, Bjork, Sheffer, & Bar, 2004) and believe that items presented once during study will be recalled just as well as items presented three times during study (Rhodes & Castel, 2008). Learners can account for extrinsic cues when making JOLs, but usually only when all experimental conditions are obvious to the individual (either by using a within-subject manipulation or explicitly describing all conditions; e.g., Castel, 2008;Koriat et al, 2004) and often requiring extensive practice or experience (but see Zechmeister & Shaughnessy, 1980).…”