年轻人和老年人元认知反应能力的年龄差异

IF 3.9 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
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":null,"pages":null},"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\":null,\"pages\":null},\"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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

当我们监控自己的学习时(通常通过学习判断(JOL)来衡量),这种元认知过程可以改变记忆内容。例如,先前的研究表明,在年轻成年人中,做出学习判断会增强对相关单词对的记忆,但不会增强对不相关单词对的记忆。在本研究中,我们考察了元认知反应性中与年龄相关的潜在差异。年轻和年长的成年人研究了相关和不相关的词对列表,以便在稍后的提示回忆测试中进行记忆。此外,受试者要么对每对单词进行联合认知(JOL),要么让刺激之间的间隔时间与联合认知时间相等。结果发现,虽然元认知判断对年轻人的记忆没有明显影响(即无反应性),但这一过程却会损害老年人的记忆(即负反应性),尤其是对不相关的词对。具体来说,与要求老年人在研究阶段预测记住每个单词的可能性相比,当每个单词后面都有一个刺激间歇时,老年人表现出更好的提示记忆能力。这可能是 JOLs 增加了任务要求/认知负荷的结果,这可能会减少老年人对词对之间关联的精细编码,但老年人保留甚至增强的语义记忆可能会掩盖对相关词对的消极反应性。今后的工作需要更好地了解导致年轻人和老年人对不同类型的待记忆信息产生反应效应的机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Age-related differences in metacognitive reactivity in younger and older adults

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
15.20%
发文量
39
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.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信