Metacognitive influences on study time allocation in an associative recognition task: An analysis of adult age differences.

Abstract

The current study evaluated a metacognitive account of study time allocation, which argues that metacognitive monitoring of recognition test accuracy and latency influences subsequent strategic control and regulation. We examined judgments of learning (JOLs), recognition test confidence judgments (CJs), and subjective response time (RT) judgments by younger and older adults in an associative recognition task involving two study-test phases, with self-paced study in phase 2. Multilevel regression analyses assessed the degree to which age and metacognitive variables predicted phase 2 study time independent of actual test accuracy and RT. Outcomes supported the metacognitive account -JOLs and CJs predicted study time independent of recognition accuracy. For older adults with errant RT judgments, subjective retrieval fluency influenced response confidence as well as (mediated through confidence) subsequent study time allocation. Older adults studied items longer which had been assigned lower CJs, suggesting no age deficit in using memory monitoring to control learning.An individual attempting to learn new information in preparation for a test must decide how much effort to spend studying and re-studying that information. Self-regulation of study behavior involves selectively choosing information to study and choosing how -and for how long -to study that information (e.g., Winne & Perry, 2000). Research on metacognition and self-regulated learning examines how individuals use monitoring and control mechanisms to optimize learning (e.g., Nelson, 1993Nelson, , 1996. A general premise is that learners' selection of items for study or allocation of study time is influenced by their current state of learning, goals for future learning, and beliefs about themselves as learners (Cull & Zechmeister, 1994; Correspondence concerning this article can be addressed to any author: Jarrod C. Hines and Christopher Hertzog: School of Psychology, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 30332-0170. Dayna R. Touron: Assistant Professor Department of Psychology, The University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Greensboro, NC 27402-6170 E-mail: E-mail: jhines3@gatech.edu, E-mail: d_touron@uncg.edu, E-mail: christopher.hertzog@psych.gatech.edu. For more information on our research programs, visit http://psychology.gatech.edu/CHertzog/.. Jarrod Hines is now at the School of Psychology, Georgia Institute of Technology. Dayna Touron is now at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. Publisher's Disclaimer:The following manuscript is the final accepted manuscript. It has not been subjected to the final copyediting, fact-checking, and proofreading required for formal publication. It is not the definitive, publisher-authenticated version. The American Psychological Association and its Council of Editors disclaim any responsibility or liabilities for errors or omissions of this manuscript version, any version derived from this manuscript by NIH, or other third parties. The published version is available at http://www.apa.or...

Memory Monitoring and Control in Young and Intermediate-Age Adults

“…As this result is in accordance with the data of relative accuracy presented, it is supposed that delayed JOLs, as they are more diagnostic of the memory performance (more accurate), are also more reliable at the time of the restudying of the topics for future memory recall testing. There is support in the literature regarding this relationship (Hines, Touron, & Hertzog, 2009). It is noteworthy that as much the STA based in the JOLs as that based in the cued-recall was significantly lower for the intermediate-age adults in the condition of delayed JOLs.…”

The role of prior knowledge in error correction for younger and older adults

“…Hines, Touron, & Hertzog, 2009;Sitzman et al, 2014;Tauber & Rhodes, 2012). Accordingly, analyses were conducted to evaluate the degree to which younger and older adults' confidence judgments and knew-it-all-along judgments from an initial test trial contributed to response accuracy on a second test for only those items that were incorrect on test 1.…”

Overconfidence produces underachievement: Inaccurate self evaluations undermine students’ learning and retention

“…Fortunately, correlational evidence (e.g., Hines, Touron, & Hertzog, 2009) and experimental evidence (e.g., Metcalfe & Finn, 2008;Thiede & Dunlosky, 1999) converge on the conclusion that learners' monitoring does influence control decisions about what to study. Whereas the influence of monitoring on the control of study has been firmly established, the present studies were designed to evaluate the under-explored question of whether the accuracy of monitoring is related to better retention.…”