A Systematic Review and Investigation of Judgment of Learning (JoL) Reactivity

Judgments of learning (JoLs) are predictions about the likelihood of recalling learnt material. JoLs have been a standard self-report tool in memory research for over 50 years, but recent research has observed that JoLs can affect memory in and of themselves: an effect termed JoL reactivity.

JoL reactivity is typically observed in word pair experiments, in which participants who give a JoL for related word pairs (e.g., dog-cat) recall more targets than participants without a JoL. Thus, JOLs appear to improve recall for related word pairs. However, despite this finding, little is understood about when or why JoL reactivity occurs. Subsequently, this thesis provides an investigation into JoL reactivity across two papers.

The first paper provides a systematic review of the JoL reactivity literature. JoL reactivity research has grown rapidly since the last systematic review, but with contradictions in the literature: some papers report positive reactivity (improved performance), others negative reactivity (impaired performance) and some no reactivity. In addition, contrasting theoretical frameworks have been put forward to explain the mechanisms that result in JoL reactivity.

The systematic literature review assesses the evidence and theoretical accounts of JoL reactivity. We observed that word pair relatedness appears to moderate the reactive effect and that there is a growing consensus that JoLs produce positive reactivity with semantically related word pairs. We also observed that relational accounts of reactivity are most common in the literature but have inconsistent evidence. There are emerging non-relational accounts, but these are tentative frameworks. Future areas for research are suggested.

The second paper investigates JoL reactivity in a transfer appropriate processing (TAP) paradigm. In an initial encoding phase, we presented participants with related, rhyming, or unrelated word pairs to induce different levels of processing. Half of the participants made a JoL after studying each word pair, while the remaining participants simply studied each word pair for an equivalent duration. Afterwards, all participants completed either standard or rhyme recognition tests.

We successfully replicated the TAP effect. In the rhyme recognition test, the participants successfully recognised more rhymes of targets from the rhyming pairs than the related and unrelated pairs. However, no significant evidence of JoL reactivity was seen, regardless of encoding or test condition. The study is the first to investigate JoL reactivity using a TAP paradigm with word pairs and provides a foundation for future work to examine the role of the test on JoL reactivity and JoL reactivity in alternative paradigms.