Evaluating the Judgment of Learning: its Limited Impact and the Power of Retrieval on Inductive Learning

Recent studies suggest that making judgments of learning (JOLs)—self-assessment of current learning status—may not merely be a neutral cognitive process, but can directly improve learning through what is called ‘JOL reactivity’. This study investigated whether making JOLs can facilitate the learning of previously studied materials (backward effect) and newly studied materials (forward effect) in inductive learning. We also examined how this effect varies depending on whether a JOL is accompanied by a retrieval attempt. Across three experiments, participants learned about various butterfly species presented in two sections (Sections A and B). Some participants made JOLs between Section A and Section B, while others did not, and then all participants took a final transfer test for both sections. In Experiment 1, merely making JOLs did not facilitate learning compared to restudy control, regardless of whether JOLs afforded covert retrieval (target-absent JOL) or not (target-present JOL). However, in Experiment 2, when participants made JOLs combined with overt retrieval prompts (retrieval practice + JOL), they outperformed the other groups in the final transfer test of Section B, showing the forward effect. Experiment 3 further revealed that the act of making JOLs combined with overt retrieval practice was as effective as (but not more than) retrieval practice without JOLs in promoting new learning. Our findings indicate that conventional forms of JOLs do not appear to enhance inductive learning; rather, they underscore the critical role of retrieval in facilitating inductive learning.