How to assess the contributions of processing fluency and beliefs to the formation of judgments of learning: methods and pitfalls
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
All previous reactivity studies presented stimuli in a unimodal form (e.g., word pairs presented visually).
“All previous reactivity studies presented stimuli in a unimodal form (e.g., word pairs presented visually; Mitchum et al., 2016; Yang, Huang, et al., 2021), which is somewhat unrepresentative of materials in real educational settings.”
From When judging what you know changes what you really know: Soliciting metamemory judgments reactively enhances children’s learning (2022) · cites this paper as Yang, Huang, et al., 2021
Making concurrent judgments of learning (JOLs) can significantly alter (typically enhance) memory itself, a reactivity effect.
“Recent studies established that making concurrent judgments of learning (JOLs) can significantly alter (typically enhance) memory itself - a reactivity effect.”
From When judging what you know changes what you really know: Soliciting metamemory judgments reactively enhances children’s learning (2022) · cites this paper as Yang, Huang, et al., 2021
It remains unknown whether people can metacognitively appreciate the reactive influence of making JOLs on their learning.
“Hence, it remains unknown whether people can metacognitively appreciate the reactive influence of making JOLs on their learning.”
From When judging what you know changes what you really know: Soliciting metamemory judgments reactively enhances children’s learning (2022) · cites this paper as Yang, Huang, et al., 2021
Research has observed positive reactivity effects on learning of word lists, related word pairs, and general knowledge facts.
“For instance, research has observed positive reactivity effects on learning of word lists (Double et al., 2018), related word pairs (Soderstrom et al., 2015), and general knowledge facts (Yang, Huang, et al., 2021), whereas no reactivity is found on learning of texts (Ariel, Karpicke, Witherby, & Tauber, 2021), unrelated word pairs (Soderstrom et al., 2015; Dougherty, Robey, & Buttaccio, 2018), or”
From When judging what you know changes what you really know: Soliciting metamemory judgments reactively enhances children’s learning (2022) · cites this paper as Yang, Huang, et al., 2021
Cites
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/bf03193146 · Cited by 65,971 · see citing works
Encoding fluency is a cue used for judgments about learning.
Hertzog, C., Dunlosky, J., Robinson, A. E., & Kidder, D. P. (2003) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition · doi:10.1037//0278-7393.29.1.22 · Cited by 187 · see citing works
The benefit of generating errors during learning
Potts, R., & Shanks, D. R. (2014) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/a0033194 · Cited by 166 · see citing works
Self-citationKoriat, A. (2008) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/mc.36.2.416 · Cited by 143 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The study that first adopted the study trials measure as an index of fluency (Koriat 2008) found a strong (inverse) correlation across words between number of study-test cycles required and final recall.”
Result
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Zhao, W., Li, B., Shanks, D. R., Zhao, W., Zheng, J., Hu, X., Su, N., Fan, T., Yin, Y., Luo, L., et al. (2022) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/cdev.13689 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Yang, C., Yu, R., Hu, X., Luo, L., Huang, T. S.-T., & Shanks, D. R.
- Affiliations
- Beijing Normal University (CN)
- Hong Kong Baptist University (HK)
- University College London (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Yang, Chunliang
- Venue
- Metacognition and Learning
- Published
- 2021-01-08
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 319-343
- ISSN
- 1556-1623 (ISSN-L)
- 1556-1631
- OpenAlex
- W3118969219
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3
- FWCI
- 2.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Metacognition and Learning (publishedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Natural Science Foundation of China (31671130, 32000742)
- United Kingdom Economic and Social Research Council (ES/P009522/1)
- Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (2019NTSS28)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
- Keywords
- judgments of learning, processing fluency, metacognition, metacognitive accuracy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review