Wenbo Zhao , Shaohang Liu , Xiaofang Tian , Baike Li , David R. Shanks , Chunliang Yang , Liang Luo
{"title":"Individual differences in the reactivity effect of judgments of learning: Cognitive factors","authors":"Wenbo Zhao , Shaohang Liu , Xiaofang Tian , Baike Li , David R. Shanks , Chunliang Yang , Liang Luo","doi":"10.1016/j.jml.2024.104574","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>An emerging body of studies has demonstrated that asking participants to make concurrent judgments of learning (JOLs) during learning can reactively change (typically enhance) their memory performance, a phenomenon known as the <em>reactivity effect</em>. The current study conducted the first exploration of individual differences in the JOL reactivity effect by employing a large-scale (<em>N</em> = 284 participants) approach. The reactivity effect was measured in a related word pair learning task, and each of four higher-order cognitive constructs, including working memory capacity (WMC), attentional control (AC), episodic memory (EM), and general fluid intelligence (gF), was assessed by multiple tasks. The results showed that making JOLs enhanced cued recall of related word pairs, reflecting an overall positive reactivity effect. WMC independently and positively predicted JOL reactivity and this prediction effect survived when controlling for the prediction effects of other cognitive constructs. After controlling for the effects of WMC, EM, and gF, AC negatively predicted JOL reactivity. Neither EM nor gF predicted reactivity. These findings lend support to the learning engagement and dual-task costs theories to jointly account for the JOL reactivity effect. Practical implications for guiding learning practices and for mitigating JOL reactivity in future metacognition research are discussed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16493,"journal":{"name":"Journal of memory and language","volume":"140 ","pages":"Article 104574"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of memory and language","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749596X24000779","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
An emerging body of studies has demonstrated that asking participants to make concurrent judgments of learning (JOLs) during learning can reactively change (typically enhance) their memory performance, a phenomenon known as the reactivity effect. The current study conducted the first exploration of individual differences in the JOL reactivity effect by employing a large-scale (N = 284 participants) approach. The reactivity effect was measured in a related word pair learning task, and each of four higher-order cognitive constructs, including working memory capacity (WMC), attentional control (AC), episodic memory (EM), and general fluid intelligence (gF), was assessed by multiple tasks. The results showed that making JOLs enhanced cued recall of related word pairs, reflecting an overall positive reactivity effect. WMC independently and positively predicted JOL reactivity and this prediction effect survived when controlling for the prediction effects of other cognitive constructs. After controlling for the effects of WMC, EM, and gF, AC negatively predicted JOL reactivity. Neither EM nor gF predicted reactivity. These findings lend support to the learning engagement and dual-task costs theories to jointly account for the JOL reactivity effect. Practical implications for guiding learning practices and for mitigating JOL reactivity in future metacognition research are discussed.
期刊介绍:
Articles in the Journal of Memory and Language contribute to the formulation of scientific issues and theories in the areas of memory, language comprehension and production, and cognitive processes. Special emphasis is given to research articles that provide new theoretical insights based on a carefully laid empirical foundation. The journal generally favors articles that provide multiple experiments. In addition, significant theoretical papers without new experimental findings may be published.
The Journal of Memory and Language is a valuable tool for cognitive scientists, including psychologists, linguists, and others interested in memory and learning, language, reading, and speech.
Research Areas include:
• Topics that illuminate aspects of memory or language processing
• Linguistics
• Neuropsychology.