Skip to main content

Metacognitive effects of initial question difficulty on subsequent memory performance

Abstract

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  • Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2009). Uniting the tribes of fluency to form a metacognitive nation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13, 219–235.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Benjamin, A. S., Bjork, R. A., & Schwartz, B. L. (1998). The mismeasure of memory: When retrieval fluency is misleading as a metamnemonic index. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 55–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodner, G. E., & Richardson-Champion, D. D. L. (2007). Remembering is in the details: Effects of test-list context on memory for an event. Memory, 15, 718–729.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Budescu, D., & Bar-Hillel, M. (1993). To guess or not to guess: A decision-theoretic view of formula scoring. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 277–291.

    Article  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 

  • Damisch, L., Mussweiler, T., & Plessner, H. (2006). Olympic medals as fruits of comparison? Assimilation and contrast in sequential performance judgements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 12, 166–178.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Finn, B. (2010). Ending on a high note: Adding a better end to effortful study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 1548–1553.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  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 

  • Hansen, J., & Wänke, M. (2008). It’s the difference that counts: Expectancy/experience discrepancy moderates the use of ease of retrieval in attitude judgments. Social Cognition, 26, 447–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higham, P. A. (2007). No special K! A signal detection framework for the strategic regulation of memory accuracy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136, 1–22.

    Article  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.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, L. L., & Dallas, M. (1981). On the relationship between autobiographical memory and perceptual learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 110, 306–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, C. M., & Lindsay, D. S. (1993). Remembering mistaken for knowing: Ease of retrieval as a basis for confidence in answers to general knowledge questions. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 1–24.

    Article  Google 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 

  • Koriat, A. (1995). Dissociating knowing and the feeling of knowing: Further evidence for the accessibility model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 311–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koriat, A., & Goldsmith, M. (1996). Monitoring and control processes in the strategic regulation of memory accuracy. Psychological Review, 103, 490–517.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe, D. P., & Balota, D. A. (2007). Context effects on remembering and knowing: The expectancy heuristic. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 536–549.

    PubMed  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 

  • Thurstone, L. L. (1919). A scoring method for mental tests. Psychological Bulletin, 16, 235–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, Y., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2010). Retrospective bias in test performance: Providing easy items at the beginning of a test makes students believe they did better on it. Memory & Cognition, 38, 366–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein, Y., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2012). The effect of question order on evaluations of test performance: How does the bias evolve? Memory & Cognition, 40, 727–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittlesea, B. W. A., & Williams, L. D. (1998). Why do strangers feel familiar, but friends don’t? A discrepancy-attribution account of feelings of familiarity. Acta Psychologica, 98, 141–165.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author note

This research was supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) within the framework of German–Israeli Project Cooperation (DIP).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ainat Pansky.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pansky, A., Goldsmith, M. Metacognitive effects of initial question difficulty on subsequent memory performance. Psychon Bull Rev 21, 1255–1262 (2014). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0597-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0597-2

Keywords

  • Relative fluency
  • Metacognition
  • Monitoring and control
  • Confidence
  • Free-report memory testing