Abstract
How aging affects the utilization of monitoring in the allocation of study time was investigated by having adults learn paired associates during multiple study-test trials. During each trial, a subject paced the presentation of individual items and later judged the likelihood of recalling each item on the upcoming test; after all items had been studied and judged, recall occurred. For both age groups in Study 1, (1) people’s judgments were highly accurate at predicting recall and (2) intraindividual correlations between judgments (or recall) on one trial, and study times on the next trial were negative, which suggests that subjects utilized monitoring to allocate study time. However, the magnitude of these correlations was less for older than for younger adults. Study 2 revealed that these differences were not due to age differences in forgetting. Results from both studies suggest that older adults do not utilize on-line monitoring to allocate study to the same degree as younger adults do, and that these differences in allocation contribute to age deficits in recall.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arenberg, D., &Robertson-Tchabo, E. E. (1977). Learning and aging. In J. E. Birren & K. W. Schaie (Eds.),Handbook of the psychology of aging (pp. 421–449). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Bäckman, L., &Dixon, R. A. (1992). Psychological compensation: A theoretical framework.Psychological Bulletin,112, 259–283.
Bieman-Copland, S., &Charness, N. (1994). Memory knowledge and memory monitoring in adulthood.Psychology & Aging,9, 287–302.
Bisanz, G. L., Vesonder, G. T., &Voss, J. F. (1978). Knowledge of one’s own responding and the relation of such knowledge to learning.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,25, 116–128.
Brigham, M. C., &Pressley, M. (1988). Cognitive monitoring and strategy choice in younger and older adults.Psychology & Aging,3, 249–257.
Cavanaugh, J. C. (1996). Memory self-efficacy as a moderator of memory change. In F. Blanchard-Fields & T. M. Hess (Eds.),Perspectives on cognitive change in adulthood and aging (pp. 488–507). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Connor, L. T., Dunlosky, J., &Hertzog, C. (1997). Age-related differences in absolute but not relative metamemory accuracy.Psychology & Aging,12, 50–71.
Craik, F. I. M. (1986). A functional account of age differences in memory. In F. Klix & H. Hagendorf (Eds.),Human memory and cognitive capabilities: Mechanisms and performances (pp. 409–422). Amsterdam: Elsevier, North-Holland.
Delbecq-Derouesné, J., &Beauvois, M. (1989). Memory processes and aging: A defect of automatic rather than controlled processes?Archives of Gerontology & Geriatrics,1(Suppl.), 121–150.
Dixon, R., &Hultsch, D. (1984). The Metamemory in Adulthood (MIA) instrument.Psychological Documents,14, 3.
Dunlosky, J., &Nelson, T. O. (1992). Importance of the kind of cue for judgments of learning (JOL) and the delayed-JOL effect.Memory & Cognition,20, 374–380.
Dunlosky, J., &Nelson, T. O. (1994). Does the sensitivity of judgments of learning (JOLs) to the effects of various study activities depend on when the JOLs occur?Journal of Memory & Language,33, 545–565.
Ekstrom, R. B., French, J. W., Harman, H. H., &Dermen, D. (1976).Manual for kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Guttentag, R. E. (1985). Memory and aging: Implications for theories of memory development during childhood.Developmental Review,5, 56–82.
Hertzog, C., &Dixon, R. (1994). Metacognitive development in adulthood and old age. In J. Metcalfe & A. P. Shimamura (Eds.),Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 227–251). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hertzog, C., &Dunlosky, J. (1996). The aging of practical memory: An overview. In D. J. Hermann, C. McEvoy, C. Hertzog, P. Hertel, & M. K. Johnson (Eds.),Basic and applied memory (Vol. 1, pp. 337–358). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hultsch, D. F., Hertzog, C., &Dixon, R. A. (1987). Age differences in metamemory: Resolving the inconsistencies.Canadian Journal of Psychology,41, 193–208.
Kausler, D. H. (1994).Learning and memory in normal aging. New York: Academic Press.
King, J. F., Zechmeister, E. B., &Shaughnessy, J. J. (1980). Judgments of knowing: The influence of retrieval practice.American Journal of Psychology,93, 329–343.
Korchin, S. J., &Basowitz, H. (1957). Age differences in verbal learning.Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology,54, 64–69.
Le Ny, J. F., Denhiere, G., &Le Taillanter, D. (1972). Regulation of study-time and interstimulus similarity in self-paced learning conditions.Acta Psychologica,36, 280–289.
Light, L. L. (1991). Memory and aging: Four hypotheses in search of data.Annual Review of Psychology,42, 333–376.
Loftus, G. R., &Masson, M. E. J. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,1, 476–490.
Lovelace, E. A., &Marsh, G. A. (1985). Prediction and evaluation of memory performance by young and old adults.Journal of Gerontology,40, 192–197.
Maki, R. H., &Berry, S. L. (1984). Metacomprehension of text material.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,10, 663–679.
Mazzoni, G., &Cornoldi, C. (1993). Strategies in study time allocation: Why is study time sometimes not effective?Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,122, 47–60.
Mazzoni, G., Cornoldi, C., &Marchitelli, G. (1990). Do memorability ratings affect study-time allocation?Memory & Cognition,18, 196–204.
McDonald-Miszczak, L., Hubley, A. M., &Hultsch, D. F. (1996). Age differences in recall and predicting recall of action events and words.Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences,51, 81–90.
Nelson, T. O., &Dunlosky, J. (1991). When people’s judgments of learning (JOLs) are extremely accurate at predicting subsequent recall: The “delayed-JOL effect”.Psychological Science,2, 267–270.
Nelson, T. O., Dunlosky, J., Graf, A., &Narens, L. (1994). Utilization of metacognitive judgments in the allocation of study during multitrial learning.Psychological Science,5, 207–213.
Nelson, T. O., &Leonesio, R. J. (1988). Allocation of self-paced study time and the “labor-in-vain effect”.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,14, 676–686.
Nelson, T. O., &Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G. H. Bower (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 26, pp. 125–173). New York: Academic Press.
Paivio, A., Yuille, J. C., & Madigan, S. A. (1968). Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns.Journal of Experimental Psychology Monographs,76 (1, Pt. 2).
Rabinowitz, J. C., Ackerman, B. P., Craik, F. I. M., &Hinchley, J. L. (1982). Aging and metamemory: The roles of relatedness and imagery.Journal of Gerontology,37, 688–695.
Runquist, W. N. (1983). Some effects of remembering on forgetting.Memory & Cognition,11, 641–650.
Salthouse, T. A. (1991).Theoretical perspectives on cognitive aging. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Salthouse, T. A. (1992).Mechanisms of age-cognition relations in adulthood. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Salthouse, T. A., &Dunlosky, J. (1995). Analyses of adult age differences in associative learning.Zeitschrift für Psychologie,203, 351–360.
Shaw, R., &Craik, F. I. M. (1989). Age differences in predictions and performance on a cued recall task.Psychology & Aging,4, 131–135.
Spencer, W. D., &Raz, N. (1995). Differential effects of aging on memory for context and content: A meta-analysis.Psychology & Aging,10, 527–539.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by the Southeastern Center for Applied Cognitive Aging Research, one of the Edward R. Roybal Centers for research in applied gerontology (funded through Grant 1 P50 AG11815-01 from NIA). The studies were conducted while the authors were supported as postdoctoral fellows at Georgia Institute of Technology by NIA Grant T32 AG00175-07.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dunlosky, J., Connor, L.T. Age differences in the allocation of study time account for age differences in memory performance. Memory & Cognition 25, 691–700 (1997). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211311
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211311