Cargando…

Delayed Metacomprehension Judgments Do Not Directly Improve Learning from Texts

Making judgments of learning (JOLs) after studying can directly improve learning. This JOL reactivity has been shown for simple materials but has scarcely been investigated with educationally relevant materials such as expository texts. The few existing studies have not yet reported any consistent g...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hausman, Hannah, Kubik, Veit
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10381644/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37504793
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11070150
_version_ 1785080494911651840
author Hausman, Hannah
Kubik, Veit
author_facet Hausman, Hannah
Kubik, Veit
author_sort Hausman, Hannah
collection PubMed
description Making judgments of learning (JOLs) after studying can directly improve learning. This JOL reactivity has been shown for simple materials but has scarcely been investigated with educationally relevant materials such as expository texts. The few existing studies have not yet reported any consistent gains in text comprehension due to providing JOLs. In the present study, we hypothesized that increasing the chances of covert retrieval attempts when making JOLs after each of five to-be-studied text passages would produce comprehension benefits at 1 week compared to restudy. In a between-subjects design, we manipulated both whether participants (N = 210) were instructed to covertly retrieve the texts, and whether they made delayed target-absent JOLs. The results indicated that delayed, target-absent JOLs did not improve text comprehension after 1 week, regardless of whether prior instructions to engage in covert retrieval were provided. Based on the two-stage model of JOLs, we reasoned that participants’ retrieval attempts during metacomprehension judgments were either insufficient (i.e., due to a quick familiarity assessment) or were ineffective (e.g., due to low retrieval success).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10381644
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103816442023-07-29 Delayed Metacomprehension Judgments Do Not Directly Improve Learning from Texts Hausman, Hannah Kubik, Veit J Intell Article Making judgments of learning (JOLs) after studying can directly improve learning. This JOL reactivity has been shown for simple materials but has scarcely been investigated with educationally relevant materials such as expository texts. The few existing studies have not yet reported any consistent gains in text comprehension due to providing JOLs. In the present study, we hypothesized that increasing the chances of covert retrieval attempts when making JOLs after each of five to-be-studied text passages would produce comprehension benefits at 1 week compared to restudy. In a between-subjects design, we manipulated both whether participants (N = 210) were instructed to covertly retrieve the texts, and whether they made delayed target-absent JOLs. The results indicated that delayed, target-absent JOLs did not improve text comprehension after 1 week, regardless of whether prior instructions to engage in covert retrieval were provided. Based on the two-stage model of JOLs, we reasoned that participants’ retrieval attempts during metacomprehension judgments were either insufficient (i.e., due to a quick familiarity assessment) or were ineffective (e.g., due to low retrieval success). MDPI 2023-07-24 /pmc/articles/PMC10381644/ /pubmed/37504793 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11070150 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Hausman, Hannah
Kubik, Veit
Delayed Metacomprehension Judgments Do Not Directly Improve Learning from Texts
title Delayed Metacomprehension Judgments Do Not Directly Improve Learning from Texts
title_full Delayed Metacomprehension Judgments Do Not Directly Improve Learning from Texts
title_fullStr Delayed Metacomprehension Judgments Do Not Directly Improve Learning from Texts
title_full_unstemmed Delayed Metacomprehension Judgments Do Not Directly Improve Learning from Texts
title_short Delayed Metacomprehension Judgments Do Not Directly Improve Learning from Texts
title_sort delayed metacomprehension judgments do not directly improve learning from texts
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10381644/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37504793
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11070150
work_keys_str_mv AT hausmanhannah delayedmetacomprehensionjudgmentsdonotdirectlyimprovelearningfromtexts
AT kubikveit delayedmetacomprehensionjudgmentsdonotdirectlyimprovelearningfromtexts