The Testing Effect as a Function of Explicit Testing Instructions and Judgments of Learning
Abstract
During study, people monitor their learning; the output of this monitoring is captured in so-called judgments of learning (JOLs). JOLs predict later recall better if they are made after a slight delay, instead of immediately after study (the delayed JOL effect). According to the self-fulfilling prophecy (SFP) hypothesis delayed JOLs are based on covert retrieval attempts from long-term memory, and successful retrieval attempts in themselves enhance learning (the testing effect). We compared memory for 40 Swahili-Swedish paired associates after a week as a function of three different learning conditions, namely study plus (i) explicitly instructed self-testing, (ii) delayed JOLs, or (iii) less self-testing. We showed that repeated delayed JOLs lead to a memory improvement that does not differ significantly from a comparable condition where the participants are explicitly testing memory, and both the latter groups performed reliably better than a group that self-tested less. The results suggest that delayed JOLs improve long-term retention as efficiently as explicit memory testing and lend support to the SFP hypothesis.
References
(2007). Testing beyond words: Using tests to enhance visuospatial map learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 474–478.
(2006). What types of learning are enhanced by a cued recall test? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 826–830.
(2008). The effects of tests on learning and forgetting. Memory & Cognition, 36, 438–448.
(2005). Using the past to predict the future. Memory & Cognition, 33, 1096–1115.
(1992). Importance of the kind of cue for judgments of learning (JOL) and the delayed-JOL effect. Memory & Cognition. Special Issue: Memory and Cognition Applied, 20, 374–380.
(1997). Similarity between the cue for judgments of learning (JOL) and the cue for test is not the primary determinant of JOL accuracy. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 34–49.
(2007). Repeated retrieval during learning is the key to long-term retention. Journal of Memory and Language, 57, 151–162.
(2008). The critical importance of retrieval for learning. Science, 319, 966–968.
(2003). Delaying judgments of learning affects memory, not metamemory. Memory & Cognition, 31, 918–929.
(2006). Exploring a mnemonic debiasing account of the underconfidence-with-practice effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 595–608.
(2008). Learning through hand- or typewriting influences visual recognition of new graphic shapes: Behavioral and functional imaging evidence. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 802–815.
(2010). Digitizing literacy: Reflections on the haptics of writing. In , Advances in haptics (pp. 385–401). Vienna, Austria: IN-TECH Web.
(2007). Testing the testing effect in the classroom. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 494–513.
(2009). Metacognitive judgments and control of study. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 159–163.
(2008). Metamemory. In ) Cognitive psychology of memory: Vol. 2. Learning and memory: A comprehensive reference. (pp. 349–362). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
(2008a). Evidence that judgments of learning are causally related to study choice (Eds.), Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 174–179.
(2008b). Familiarity and retrieval processes in delayed judgments of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 1084–1097.
(1984). A comparison of current measures of the accuracy of feeling-of-knowing predictions. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 109–133.
(1991). When people’s judgments of learning (JOLs) are extremely accurate at predicting subsequent recall: The “delayed-JOL effect”. Psychological Science, 2, 267–270.
(1994). Norms of paired-associate recall during multitrial learning of Swahili-English translation equivalents. Memory, 2, 325–335.
(1988). Allocation of self-paced study time and the “labor-in-vain effect”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14, 676–686.
(2004). A revised methodology for research on metamemory: Pre-judgment Recall and Monitoring (PRAM). Psychological Methods, 9, 53–69.
(2011). The influence of delaying judgments of learning on metacognitive accuracy: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 131–148.
(2006a). The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 181–210.
(2006b). Test enhanced learning. Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17, 249–255.
(2005). A model for stochastic drift in memory strength to account for judgments of learning. Psychological Review, 112, 932–950.
(1992). When predictions create reality: Judgments of learning may alter what they are intended to assess. Psychological Science, 3, 315–316.
(2009). The testing effect and the retention interval: Questions and answers. Experimental Psychology, 56, 252–257.
(1990). Judgment and decision making. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
