Must we do this again? Evaluating JOL carryover effects in cued-recall.

IF 1.9 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Memory Pub Date : 2026-07-01 Epub Date: 2026-04-09 DOI:10.1080/09658211.2026.2652400
Amelia G Morehead, Mark J Huff, Nicholas P Maxwell
{"title":"Must we do this again? Evaluating JOL carryover effects in cued-recall.","authors":"Amelia G Morehead, Mark J Huff, Nicholas P Maxwell","doi":"10.1080/09658211.2026.2652400","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Providing Judgments of Learning (JOLs) for cue-target pairs at study often improves recall for related pairs versus a silent reading control task, a pattern termed JOL reactivity. While reactivity patterns have been found consistently using a variety of stimuli and test types, they appear to only occur when participants are explicitly instructed to provide JOLs. Whether JOL reactivity can carry over to cue-target pairs when JOLs are not directly applied is unclear. We evaluated this possibility by comparing cued-recall between two study-test blocks. In two experiments, participants either provided JOLs on both blocks or only in the first block with instructions to provide covert JOLs on the second block. Although JOL reactivity was found with explicit JOLs in the first block, it did not carry over to covert JOLs in the second block (Experiment 1), nor did reactivity carry over when participants were frequently reminded to make covert JOLs (Experiment 2). Reactivity therefore appears to be a byproduct of overtly provided judgments.</p>","PeriodicalId":18569,"journal":{"name":"Memory","volume":" ","pages":"609-619"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2026.2652400","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/4/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Providing Judgments of Learning (JOLs) for cue-target pairs at study often improves recall for related pairs versus a silent reading control task, a pattern termed JOL reactivity. While reactivity patterns have been found consistently using a variety of stimuli and test types, they appear to only occur when participants are explicitly instructed to provide JOLs. Whether JOL reactivity can carry over to cue-target pairs when JOLs are not directly applied is unclear. We evaluated this possibility by comparing cued-recall between two study-test blocks. In two experiments, participants either provided JOLs on both blocks or only in the first block with instructions to provide covert JOLs on the second block. Although JOL reactivity was found with explicit JOLs in the first block, it did not carry over to covert JOLs in the second block (Experiment 1), nor did reactivity carry over when participants were frequently reminded to make covert JOLs (Experiment 2). Reactivity therefore appears to be a byproduct of overtly provided judgments.

我们必须再来一次吗?线索回忆中JOL结转效应的评估。
在学习中为线索目标对提供学习判断(JOLs)通常比沉默阅读控制任务更能提高对相关对的记忆,这种模式被称为JOL反应性。虽然在使用各种刺激和测试类型时发现了一致的反应模式,但它们似乎只发生在参与者被明确指示提供JOLs时。当joll不直接应用时,joll反应性是否可以延续到线索目标对尚不清楚。我们通过比较两个学习测试块之间的线索回忆来评估这种可能性。在两个实验中,参与者要么在两个区块上提供JOLs,要么只在第一个区块上提供指令,在第二个区块上提供隐蔽的JOLs。虽然在第一个区块中发现了显性工作的反应性,但在第二个区块中,它没有延续到隐蔽的工作(实验1),当参与者经常被提醒做隐蔽的工作时,反应性也没有延续(实验2)。因此,反应性似乎是公开提供判断的副产品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Memory
Memory PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
79
期刊介绍: Memory publishes high quality papers in all areas of memory research. This includes experimental studies of memory (including laboratory-based research, everyday memory studies, and applied memory research), developmental, educational, neuropsychological, clinical and social research on memory. By representing all significant areas of memory research, the journal cuts across the traditional distinctions of psychological research. Memory therefore provides a unique venue for memory researchers to communicate their findings and ideas both to peers within their own research tradition in the study of memory, and also to the wider range of research communities with direct interest in human memory.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书