Premium
Study for now, but judge for later: Delayed judgments of learning promote long‐term retention
Author(s) -
SUNDQVIST MAX LARSSON,
TODOROV IVO,
KUBIK VEIT,
JÖNSSON FREDRIK U.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
scandinavian journal of psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.743
H-Index - 72
eISSN - 1467-9450
pISSN - 0036-5564
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2012.00968.x
Subject(s) - psychology , forgetting , cued recall , assertion , cognitive psychology , metamemory , test (biology) , recall , social psychology , metacognition , developmental psychology , free recall , cognition , paleontology , neuroscience , computer science , biology , programming language
Larsson Sundqvist, M., Todorov, I., Kubik, V. & Jönsson, F.U. (2012) Study for now, but judge for later: Delayed judgments of learning promote long‐term retention. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 53, 450–454. Delayed judgments of learning (JOL) are assumed to be based on covert retrieval attempts. A common finding is that testing memory during learning improves later retention (i.e., the testing effect), and even more so than an equivalent amount of study, but only after a longer retention interval. To test the assertion that also delayed JOLs improve memory, the participants either studied Swahili‐Swedish word pairs four times, or they both studied (two times) and performed delayed JOLs (two times) alternately. Final cued recall test were given after either five minutes or one week. Results showed a reliable learning‐group by retention‐interval interaction, with less forgetting in the group that alternated between studying and making JOLs. The results are discussed in relation to the self‐fulfilling prophecy account of Spellman and Bjork (1992), and in terms of study advice, the results further underscore the importance of delaying JOLs when studying and evaluating one’s ongoing learning.