St Andrews Research Repository

St Andrews University HomeSt Andrews University Library
View Item 
  •   St Andrews Research Repository
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • View Item
  •   St Andrews Research Repository
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • View Item
  •   St Andrews Research Repository
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • University of St Andrews Research
  • View Item
  • Login
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Understanding metacognitive confidence : insights from judgment-of-learning justifications

Thumbnail
View/Open
Jersakova_et_al_2017_Metacognitive_Confidence_JML_AuthorVersion.pdf (1.596Mb)
Date
12/2017
Author
Jersakova, Radka
Allan, Richard
Booth, Jonathan
Souchay, Celine
O'Connor, Akira Robert
Keywords
Metacognition
Judgments-of-learning
Episodic memory
Confidence
Linguistics
BF Psychology
NDAS
BDC
Metadata
Show full item record
Abstract
This study employed the delayed judgment-of-learning (JOL) paradigm to investigate the content of metacognitive judgments; after studying cue-target word-pairs, participants predicted their ability to remember targets on a future memory test (cued recognition in Experiments 1 and 2 and cued recall in Experiment 3). In Experiment 1 and the confidence JOL group of Experiment 3, participants used a commonly employed 6-point numeric confidence JOL scale (0–20–40–60–80–100%). In Experiment 2 and the binary JOL group of Experiment 3 participants first made a binary yes/no JOL prediction followed by a 3-point verbal confidence judgment (sure-maybe-guess). In all experiments, on a subset of trials, participants gave a written justification of why they gave that specific JOL response. We used natural language processing techniques (latent semantic analysis and word frequency [n-gram] analysis) to characterize the content of the written justifications and to capture what types of evidence evaluation uniquely separate one JOL response type from others. We also used a machine learning classification algorithm (support vector machine [SVM]) to quantify the extent to which any two JOL responses differed from each other. We found that: (i) participants can justify and explain their JOLs; (ii) these justifications reference cue familiarity and target accessibility and so are particularly consistent with the two-stage metacognitive model; and (iii) JOL confidence judgements do not correspond to yes/no responses in the manner typically assumed within the literature (i.e. 0–40% interpreted as no predictions).
Citation
Jersakova , R , Allan , R , Booth , J , Souchay , C & O'Connor , A R 2017 , ' Understanding metacognitive confidence : insights from judgment-of-learning justifications ' , Journal of Memory and Language , vol. 97 , pp. 187-207 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2017.08.002
Publication
Journal of Memory and Language
Status
Peer reviewed
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2017.08.002
ISSN
0749-596X
Type
Journal article
Rights
© 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. This work has been made available online in accordance with the publisher’s policies. This is the author created accepted version manuscript following peer review and as such may differ slightly from the final published version. The final published version of this work is available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2017.08.002
Description
This research was supported by the Economic and Social Research Council Studentship awarded to Radka Jersakova [ES/J500215/1].
Collections
  • University of St Andrews Research
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/10023/15899

Items in the St Andrews Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Advanced Search

Browse

All of RepositoryCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateNamesTitlesSubjectsClassificationTypeFunderThis CollectionBy Issue DateNamesTitlesSubjectsClassificationTypeFunder

My Account

Login

Open Access

To find out how you can benefit from open access to research, see our library web pages and Open Access blog. For open access help contact: openaccess@st-andrews.ac.uk.

How to submit research papers

The full text of research papers can be submitted to the repository via PURE, the University's research information system. For help see our guide: How to deposit in Pure.

Electronic thesis deposit

Help with deposit.

Repository help

For repository help contact: Digital-Repository@st-andrews.ac.uk.

Give Feedback

Cookie policy

This site may use cookies. Please see Terms and Conditions.

Usage statistics

COUNTER-compliant statistics on downloads from the repository are available from the IRUS-UK Service. Contact us for information.

© University of St Andrews Library

University of St Andrews is a charity registered in Scotland, No SC013532.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter