Search

The transfer-appropriate monitoring (TAM) hypothesis of metamemory predicts that judgment of learning (JOL) accuracy should improve when conditions during JOLs closely match conditions of the memory test. The authors devised 5 types of delayed JOLs for paired associates and varied them along with the type of memory test (cued recall or recognition). If the TAM hypothesis is correct, JOL and test type should interact to influence metamemory. Contrary to TAM, metamemory accuracy did not improve when JOL and test conditions matched but instead tended to vary according to whether the answer was apparent at time of JOL. Memory test scores and JOL magnitude were both greater when the correct target was evident during JOLs. Overall, the results are largely consistent with a monitoring retrieval view of delayed JOLs and do not support TAM as a viable account of JOL accuracy.

Judgments of learning (JOLs) made after a 5-min delay are almost perfectly accurate: the 'delayed-JOL effect' (T. O. Nelson & J. Dunlosky, 1991). The mechanisms underlying this phenomenon have been the subject of debate. This study examined the effects of delays and short-term memory (STM) distraction on memory and metamemory (JOLs). STM distraction (2.5-30 s) immediately following encoding increased both JOL accuracy and mean cued recall. However, JOLs made after longer delays (4-5 min) were even more accurate. In addition, making a JOL at longer delays improved cued-recall performance. Conditional probabilities of cued recall (given successful initial retrieval) also increased over time and with interference, indicating that delayed JOLs may alter what they assess. Finally, increased confidence was associated with shorter JOL latencies only at delays. The results are consistent with an accessibility view of metamemory (e.g., A. Koriat, 1993).

Three experiments examined metamemory for categorized lists of items. Judgments of learning (JOLs) were obtained from college students either immediately after study or following a brief (at least 30-s) delay. In contrast to past findings (e.g., T.O. Nelson & J. Dunlosky, 1991), no advantage was found for delayed JOLs in Experiment 1, using a standard, prediction-based metamemory cue. In Experiment 2, knowledge-based judgments were elicited, and delayed JOL accuracy improved significantly. The relative efficacy of 4 different metamemory cues was examined in Experiment 3. An interaction between the timing and phrasing of JOL cues was detected: Delayed JOLs were more accurate than immediate JOLs only when knowledge-based cues were used. These results are interpreted in A. Koriat's (1997) cue-utilization framework for JOL accuracy, and they show that the phrasing of metamemory cues can have a substantial impact on monitoring accuracy.