Judgments of Learning at Delays: Shifts in Response Patterns or Increased Metamemory Accuracy?
- 1 July 1997
- journal article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Psychological Science
- Vol. 8 (4), 318-321
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00445.x
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 13 references indexed in Scilit:
- Dissociating knowing and the feeling of knowing: Further evidence for the accessibility model.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1995
- Does the Sensitivity of Judgments of Learning (JOLs) to the Effects of Various Study Activities Depend on When the JOLs Occur?Journal of Memory and Language, 1994
- How do we know that we know? The accessibility model of the feeling of knowing.Psychological Review, 1993
- Importance of the kind of cue for judgments of learning (JOL) and the delayed-JOL effectMemory & Cognition, 1992
- When People's Judgments of Learning (JOLs) are Extremely Accurate at Predicting Subsequent Recall: The “Delayed-JOL Effect”Psychological Science, 1991
- Do different metamemory judgments tap the same underlying aspects of memory?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1990
- Metamemory: Monitoring future recallability in free and cued recallBulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1984
- Metamemory: Monitoring future recallability during study.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1984
- A comparison of current measures of the accuracy of feeling-of-knowing predictions.Psychological Bulletin, 1984
- Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1968