Intuition and metacognition: The effect of semantic coherence on judgments of learning

被引:6
作者
Undorf, Monika [1 ]
Zander, Thea [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Mannheim, Sch Social Sci, Dept Psychol, D-68131 Mannheim, Germany
[2] Univ Basel, Dept Psychol, Basel, Switzerland
关键词
Metamemory; Judgments of learning; Processing fluency; Intuition; Compound remote associates; PROCESSING FLUENCY; RETRIEVAL FLUENCY; RELATEDNESS; EXPERIENCE; BELIEFS; MEMORY; SIZE;
D O I
10.3758/s13423-016-1189-0
中图分类号
B841 [心理学研究方法];
学科分类号
040201 ;
摘要
The idea that two distinct modes of thought affect human cognition and behavior has received considerable attention in psychology. In the domain of metacognition, it is assumed that metacognitive judgments are based on both nonanalytic, experience-based processes and analytic, theory-based processes. This study examined whether the experience-based process of intuition underlies people's predictions of their future memory performance (judgments of learning; JOLs). In four experiments, people made JOLs and took a test on compound remote associates, that is, groups of 3 words that were either remote associates of a single solution word (coherent triads) or had no common associate (incoherent triads). Previous research has shown that increased fluency of processing coherent triads produces brief positive affects that may underlie judgments. In all experiments, JOLs were higher for coherent than for incoherent triads. The same was true for recognition memory and free recall performance. Moreover, Experiments 2 and 3 demonstrated that coherent triads were processed more fluently (i.e., read more quickly) than incoherent triads. Finally, Experiments 3 and 4 showed that the effect of semantic coherence on JOLs occurred for participants who were aware and unaware of relations between all three triad words, but was more pronounced for aware participants. In sum, this study demonstrates that intuition impacts JOLs over and above theory-based processes.
引用
收藏
页码:1217 / 1224
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] What moderates the accuracy of ease of learning judgments?
    Jemstedt, Andreas
    Kubik, Veit
    Jonsson, Fredrik U.
    METACOGNITION AND LEARNING, 2017, 12 (03) : 337 - 355
  • [42] Simultaneous utilization of multiple cues in judgments of learning
    Undorf, Monika
    Soellner, Anke
    Broeder, Arndt
    MEMORY & COGNITION, 2018, 46 (04) : 507 - 519
  • [43] Testing for the phenomenal: Intuition, metacognition, and philosophical methodology
    Egler, Miguel
    MIND & LANGUAGE, 2020, 35 (01) : 48 - 66
  • [44] The effect of identical word pairs on people's metamemory judgments: What are the contributions of processing fluency and beliefs about memory?
    Mueller, Michael L.
    Dunlosky, John
    Tauber, Sarah K.
    QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2016, 69 (04) : 781 - 799
  • [45] Judgments of learning and improvement
    Townsend, Corinne L.
    Heit, Evan
    MEMORY & COGNITION, 2011, 39 (02) : 204 - 216
  • [46] Testing Judgments of Learning in New Contexts to Reduce Confidence
    Saenz, Gabriel D.
    Smith, Steven M.
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED RESEARCH IN MEMORY AND COGNITION, 2018, 7 (04) : 540 - 551
  • [47] Reactivity of Judgments of Learning in a Levels-of-Processing Paradigm
    Tekin, Eylul
    Roediger, Henry L., III
    ZEITSCHRIFT FUR PSYCHOLOGIE-JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2020, 228 (04): : 278 - 290
  • [48] Lecturer fluency can impact students' judgments of learning and actual learning performance
    Wilford, Miko M.
    Kurpad, Nayantara
    Platt, Melanie
    Weinstein-Jones, Yana
    APPLIED COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY, 2020, 34 (06) : 1444 - 1456
  • [49] Effects of Lecture Fluency and Instructor Experience on Students' Judgments of Learning, Test Scores, and Evaluations of Instructors
    Carpenter, Shana K.
    Northern, Paige E.
    Tauber, Sarah Uma
    Toftness, Alexander R.
    JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-APPLIED, 2020, 26 (01) : 26 - 39
  • [50] Effect of disfluency on learning outcomes, metacognitive judgments and cognitive load in computer assisted learning environments
    Ilic, Ulas
    Akbulut, Yavuz
    COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 2019, 99 : 310 - 321