Skip to Main Content
 

Global Search Box

 
 
 
 

Files

File List


Lauren Yeager Dissertation Defense.pdf (1.21 MB)

ETD Abstract Container

Abstract Header

Assessing Metacognitive Illusions: Fluency, Timing, and Judgments-of-Learning

Yeager, Lauren T
http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=bgsu1555583016781281

Abstract Details

2019, Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.), Bowling Green State University, Psychology/Experimental.
The present study aimed to reconcile two hypothetical mechanisms driving JOL delay effects. The first hypothesis is the monitoring-dual-memories (MDM) hypothesis proposed by Dunlosky and Nelson (1992), which states that increased accuracy of delayed judgments of learning (JOLs) occurs because delayed JOLs activate the same memory storage system as the memory task itself (i.e., long-term memory). The second hypothesis is the accessibility model proposed by Koriat (1993) which states that delayed JOLs are more accurate because they increase retrieval fluency by reinforcing memory activation. Fluency research (e.g., Ball, Klein, & Brewer, 2014; Mueller, Dunlosky, Tauber, & Rhodes, 2014; Reber & Greifeneder, 2017) has not previously applied the accessibility model, but the model may explain fluency’s effects on metacognitive illusions, such that increased processing leads to increased encoding fluency creating a false sense of knowing. This dissertation presents two experiments and a combined analysis in which I investigated the effects of fluency and JOL delay on the size of metacognitive illusions measured in ways that replicated previous research and in ways that are novel in learning research. Through an interaction between JOL timing and fluency, the MDM hypothesis explains the retrieval side of the memory process whereas the accessibility model explains the encoding side of the memory process. The remainder of the findings generally supported the MDM hypothesis. The present results also established a new avenue for investigating metacognitive illusions and call into question the findings of previous research. Specifically, participants’ prediction of their future memory performance may not be as poor as previously thought. Implications for these findings and future directions are discussed.
Richard Anderson, Dr. (Advisor)
Lynn Darby, Dr. (Other)
Dale Klopfer, Dr. (Committee Member)
Laura Leventhal, Dr. (Committee Member)
89 p.
Psychology
Memory; Metacognition; Metacognitive Illusions; Fluency; Font Size; JOL Timing; JOL; Judgments of Learning

Recommended Citations

Citations

  • Yeager, L. T. (2019). Assessing Metacognitive Illusions: Fluency, Timing, and Judgments-of-Learning [Doctoral dissertation, Bowling Green State University]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=bgsu1555583016781281

    APA Style (7th edition)

  • Yeager, Lauren. Assessing Metacognitive Illusions: Fluency, Timing, and Judgments-of-Learning. 2019. Bowling Green State University, Doctoral dissertation. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center, http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=bgsu1555583016781281.

    MLA Style (8th edition)

  • Yeager, Lauren. "Assessing Metacognitive Illusions: Fluency, Timing, and Judgments-of-Learning." Doctoral dissertation, Bowling Green State University, 2019. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=bgsu1555583016781281

    Chicago Manual of Style (17th edition)

bgsu1555583016781281
282
© 2019, all rights reserved.
This open access ETD is published by Bowling Green State University and OhioLINK.