Dillon H. Murphy, Matthew G. Rhodes, Alan D. Castel
{"title":"年轻人和老年人元认知反应能力的年龄差异","authors":"Dillon H. Murphy, Matthew G. Rhodes, Alan D. Castel","doi":"10.1007/s11409-024-09391-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>When we monitor our learning, often measured via judgments of learning (JOLs), this metacognitive process can change what is remembered. For example, prior work has demonstrated that making JOLs enhances memory for related, but not unrelated, word pairs in younger adults. In the current study, we examined potential age-related differences in metacognitive reactivity. Younger and older adults studied lists of related and unrelated word pairs to remember for a later cued recall test where they would be presented with one of the words from the pair and be asked to recall its associate. Additionally, participants either made a JOL for each pair or had an inter-stimulus interval of equal duration as the JOL period. Results revealed that while making metacognitive judgments did not significantly affect memory in younger adults (i.e., no reactivity), this procedure impaired memory in older adults (i.e., negative reactivity), particularly for unrelated word pairs. Specifically, older adults demonstrated better cued recall when each word was followed by an inter-stimulus interval than when asked to predict the likelihood of remembering each word during the study phase. This may be a consequence of JOLs increasing task demands/cognitive load, which could reduce the elaborative encoding of associations between word pairs in older adults, but older adults’ preserved or even enhanced semantic memory may mask negative reactivity for related word pairs. Future work is needed to better understand the mechanisms contributing to the reactivity effects in younger and older adults for different types of to-be-remembered information.</p>","PeriodicalId":47385,"journal":{"name":"Metacognition and Learning","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Age-related differences in metacognitive reactivity in younger and older adults\",\"authors\":\"Dillon H. Murphy, Matthew G. Rhodes, Alan D. Castel\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11409-024-09391-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>When we monitor our learning, often measured via judgments of learning (JOLs), this metacognitive process can change what is remembered. For example, prior work has demonstrated that making JOLs enhances memory for related, but not unrelated, word pairs in younger adults. In the current study, we examined potential age-related differences in metacognitive reactivity. Younger and older adults studied lists of related and unrelated word pairs to remember for a later cued recall test where they would be presented with one of the words from the pair and be asked to recall its associate. Additionally, participants either made a JOL for each pair or had an inter-stimulus interval of equal duration as the JOL period. Results revealed that while making metacognitive judgments did not significantly affect memory in younger adults (i.e., no reactivity), this procedure impaired memory in older adults (i.e., negative reactivity), particularly for unrelated word pairs. Specifically, older adults demonstrated better cued recall when each word was followed by an inter-stimulus interval than when asked to predict the likelihood of remembering each word during the study phase. This may be a consequence of JOLs increasing task demands/cognitive load, which could reduce the elaborative encoding of associations between word pairs in older adults, but older adults’ preserved or even enhanced semantic memory may mask negative reactivity for related word pairs. Future work is needed to better understand the mechanisms contributing to the reactivity effects in younger and older adults for different types of to-be-remembered information.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47385,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Metacognition and Learning\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Metacognition and Learning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-024-09391-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Metacognition and Learning","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-024-09391-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Age-related differences in metacognitive reactivity in younger and older adults
When we monitor our learning, often measured via judgments of learning (JOLs), this metacognitive process can change what is remembered. For example, prior work has demonstrated that making JOLs enhances memory for related, but not unrelated, word pairs in younger adults. In the current study, we examined potential age-related differences in metacognitive reactivity. Younger and older adults studied lists of related and unrelated word pairs to remember for a later cued recall test where they would be presented with one of the words from the pair and be asked to recall its associate. Additionally, participants either made a JOL for each pair or had an inter-stimulus interval of equal duration as the JOL period. Results revealed that while making metacognitive judgments did not significantly affect memory in younger adults (i.e., no reactivity), this procedure impaired memory in older adults (i.e., negative reactivity), particularly for unrelated word pairs. Specifically, older adults demonstrated better cued recall when each word was followed by an inter-stimulus interval than when asked to predict the likelihood of remembering each word during the study phase. This may be a consequence of JOLs increasing task demands/cognitive load, which could reduce the elaborative encoding of associations between word pairs in older adults, but older adults’ preserved or even enhanced semantic memory may mask negative reactivity for related word pairs. Future work is needed to better understand the mechanisms contributing to the reactivity effects in younger and older adults for different types of to-be-remembered information.
期刊介绍:
The journal "Metacognition and Learning" addresses various components of metacognition, such as metacognitive awareness, experiences, knowledge, and executive skills.
Both general metacognition as well as domain-specific metacognitions in various task domains (mathematics, physics, reading, writing etc.) are considered. Papers may address fundamental theoretical issues, measurement issues regarding both quantitative and qualitative methods, as well as empirical studies about individual differences in metacognition, relations with other learner characteristics and learning strategies, developmental issues, the training of metacognition components in learning, and the teacher’s role in metacognition training. Studies highlighting the role of metacognition in self- or co-regulated learning as well as its relations with motivation and affect are also welcomed.
Submitted papers are judged on theoretical relevance, methodological thoroughness, and appeal to an international audience. The journal aims for a high academic standard with relevance to the field of educational practices.
One restriction is that papers should pertain to the role of metacognition in learning situations. Self-regulation in clinical settings, such as coping with phobia or anxiety outside learning situations, is beyond the scope of the journal.