Study for now, but judge for later: Delayed judgments of learning promote long‐term retention

Sundqvist, Max Larsson; Todorov, Ivo; Kubik, Veit; Jönsson, Fredrik U.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9450.2012.00968.x

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 35 publications

(74 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent evidence suggests testing effects can diminish or disappear if the learning task includes making JOLs (Jönsson, Hedner, & Olsson, 2012). Furthermore, making a JOL can act like a test trial in the way it enhances memory (Sundqvist, Todorov, Kubik, & Jönsson, 2012). The present findings did not directly address this issue by including a no-JOL condition, but they are consistent with the idea that making JOLs enhances memory for presentation trials more than it does for test trials, thereby diminishing the testing effect.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feedback reduces the metacognitive benefit of tests.

Kornell

Rhodes

2013

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Testing long-term memory has dual benefits: It enhances learning and it helps learners discriminate what they know from what they do not know. The latter benefit, known as delayed judgment of learning (dJOL) effect, has been well documented, but in prior research participants have not been provided with test feedback. Yet when people study they almost universally (a) get feedback and (b) judge their learning subsequent to receiving the feedback. Thus, in the first three experiments, participants made JOLs following tests with feedback. Adding feedback significantly decreased the dJOL effect relative to conditions taking a test without receiving feedback. In Experiment 4, participants made decisions about which items to restudy (without actually restudying); adding feedback also decreased the accuracy of these decisions. These findings suggest that, in realistic situations, tests enhance self-monitoring, but not as much as previously thought. Judging memory based on prior test performance and ignoring the effects of feedback appears to produce an "illusion of not knowing."

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feedback reduces the metacognitive benefit of tests.

Kornell

Rhodes

2013

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, in stepwise MCQs, these retrieval processes would be covert (i.e., without overt response) and system-paced, which makes the questions easier to administer (e.g., when using response systems that are not suitable for answering open questions). Covert retrieval during which learners bring information to mind without making an overt response, still enhances retention compared to practice without retrieval opportunity, both when retrieval is instructed (e.g., Sundqvist et al, 2017) and uninstructed (e.g., Putnam & Roediger, 2013; Sundqvist et al, 2012). Therefore, we expected the stepwise display to introduce a beneficial interim step of effortful recall compared to standard MCQs.…”

Section: Retrieval Practice With Mcqs and Open Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimizing multiple-choice questions for retrieval practice: Delayed display of answer alternatives enhances vocabulary learning.

van den Broek,

Gerritsen,

Oomen

et al. 2023

Journal of Educational Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiple-choice questions (MCQs) are popular in vocabulary software because they can be scored automatically and are compatible with many input devices (e.g., touchscreens). Answering MCQs is beneficial for learning, especially when learners retrieve knowledge from memory to evaluate plausible answer alternatives. However, such retrieval may not always occur (e.g., with easy-to-guess answers). Therefore, we tested whether we could optimize MCQs for retrieval practice with a stepwise display, which presents the question before the answer options. This creates an opportunity for cued recall. In an experimental classroom study (N = 75) and three online experiments with adult participants (N = 45, N = 77, and N = 79), participants practiced vocabulary with either standard MCQs or stepwise MCQs: In standard MCQs, a word was presented with three possible translations; in stepwise MCQs, it was shown for 4 s before the translations appeared. In three of the four experiments (Experiments 1, 3a, and 3b), stepwise MCQs enhanced retention significantly compared to standard MCQs, measured by a posttest several days after practice. Benefits of stepwise MCQs were found for different translation directions (Experiments 1 and 3) and both with easy-to-guess answers (noncompetitive answer options, Experiment 1) and hard-to-guess answers (competitive answer options, Experiment 3). However, the effect was most robust for questions with noncompetitive answer options (Experiments 1, 3a, and 3b) and for learners who reported trying to retrieve the answer from memory during the stepwise display (Experiments 1 and 3). Moreover, retention was generally enhanced by competitive, hard-to-guess answer options (Experiments 3a and 3b). Overall, a stepwise display is a promising and easy-to-implement manipulation to optimize MCQs for retrieval practice.

show abstract

“…In previous studies of the forward effects of tests, researchers have proposed the context-change theory, strategy-change theory, activation facilitation theory, test-expectancy theory, and others. Considering that the delayed JOL and test have a certain common basis, whether these theories are also applicable to the delayed JOL needs to be further tested ( Sundqvist et al 2012 ; Akdoğan et al 2016 ).…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Forward Effect of Delayed Judgments of Learning Is Influenced by Difficulty in Memory and Category Learning

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Delayed judgment of learning (JOL) is a widely used metacognitive monitoring strategy that can also enhance learning outcomes. However, the potential benefits of delayed JOL on subsequent learning of new material, known as the forward effect of delayed JOL, and its stability and underlying mechanisms have yet to be fully explored. In this study, we investigated the forward effect of delayed JOL using previously unexamined word pair materials and explored the boundary conditions of this effect by manipulating the difficulty of the materials. We also examined this effect within the context of category learning. Our findings demonstrate that delayed JOL significantly enhanced the retention of new information (Experiment 1A), while the forward effect of the delayed JOL occurred only for material with a certain degree of difficulty rather than for easy material (Experiment 1B). These findings were extended and replicated using category learning (Experiment 2). These results suggest that delayed JOL can be used as a preparation strategy for subsequent learning, particularly when faced with challenging materials. Our study provides novel insights into the potential benefits and limitations of delayed JOL and contributes to our understanding of the underlying mechanisms that govern metacognitive monitoring and learning strategies.

show abstract

Study for now, but judge for later: Delayed judgments of learning promote long‐term retention

Cited by 8 publications

References 35 publications

Feedback reduces the metacognitive benefit of tests.

Feedback reduces the metacognitive benefit of tests.

Optimizing multiple-choice questions for retrieval practice: Delayed display of answer alternatives enhances vocabulary learning.

The Forward Effect of Delayed Judgments of Learning Is Influenced by Difficulty in Memory and Category Learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About