Metacognitive effects of initial question difficulty on subsequent memory performance
- 496 Downloads
In two experiments, we examined whether relative retrieval fluency (the relative ease or difficulty of answering questions from memory) would be translated, via metacognitive monitoring and control processes, into an overt effect on the controlled behavior—that is, the decision whether to answer a question or abstain. Before answering a target set of multiple-choice general-knowledge questions (intermediate-difficulty questions in Exp. 1, deceptive questions in Exp. 2), the participants first answered either a set of difficult questions or a set of easy questions. For each question, they provided a forced-report answer, followed by a subjective assessment of the likelihood that their answer was correct (confidence) and by a free-report control decision—whether or not to report the answer for a potential monetary bonus (or penalty). The participants’ ability to answer the target questions (forced-report proportion correct) was unaffected by the initial question difficulty. However, a predicted metacognitive contrast effect was observed: When the target questions were preceded by a set of difficult rather than easy questions, the participants were more confident in their answers to the target questions, and hence were more likely to report them, thus increasing the quantity of freely reported correct information. The option of free report was more beneficial after initial question difficulty than after initial question ease, in terms of both the gain in accuracy (Exp. 2) and a smaller cost in quantity (Exps. 1 and 2). These results demonstrate that changes in subjective experience can influence metacognitive monitoring and control, thereby affecting free-report memory performance independently of forced-report performance.
KeywordsRelative fluency Metacognition Monitoring and control Confidence Free-report memory testing
This research was supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) within the framework of German–Israeli Project Cooperation (DIP).
- Benjamin, A. S., & Bjork, R. A. (1996). Retrieval fluency as a metacognitive index. In L. M. Reder (Ed.), Implicit memory and metacognition (pp. 309–338). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Costermans, J., Lories, G., & Ansay, C. (1992). Confidence level and feeling of knowing in question answering: The weight of inferential processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 142–150.Google Scholar
- Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., & Lichtenstein, S. (1977). Knowing with certainty: The appropriateness of extreme confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 552–564.Google Scholar
- Goldsmith, M. (2011). Quantity-accuracy profiles or type-2 signal detection measures? Similar methods toward a common goal. In P. A. Higham & J. P. Leboe (Eds.), Constructions of remembering and metacognition: Essays in honor of Bruce Whittlesea (pp. 128–136). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave-Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Goldsmith, M., & Koriat, A. (2008). The strategic regulation of memory accuracy and informativeness. In A. S. Benjamin & B. H. Ross (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 48, pp. 1–60). London, UK: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Higham, P. A. (2011). Accuracy discrimination and type-2 signal detection theory: Clarifications, extensions, and an analysis of bias. In P. A. Higham & J. P. Leboe (Eds.), Constructions of remembering and metacognition: Essays in honor of Bruce Whittlesea (pp. 109–127). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave-Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kelley, C. M., & Rhodes, M. G. (2002). Making sense and nonsense of experience: Attributions in memory and judgment. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 41, pp. 293–320). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 26, pp. 125–173). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar