Skip to main content
Log in

Effects of keyword tasks and biasing titles on metacognitive monitoring and recall

Metacognition and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This investigation examines the effects of keyword tasks (Immediate vs. Delayed) on metacognitive monitoring, study regulation, and recall in multi-step learning tasks, which require learning information from expository texts. The titles of the expository texts were biased towards information that was either stated close to the title (Related/Close), distant from the title (Related/Distant), or unrelated to the title (Unrelated). Based on the Cue-Utilization Framework, we hypothesized that learners’ metacognitive monitoring and study regulation would be informed by mnemonic cues derived from text-titles and keyword tasks. Two hundred and thirteen American undergraduate students studied six expository texts, generated keywords, provided judgments of learning, and wrote about what they recalled before and after a self-regulated restudy trial. In line with our main hypothesis, the results revealed that learners who generated keywords immediately overestimated their current state of learning to a greater extent than learners who generated keywords with a delay. Contrary to our expectations, the greater monitoring accuracy observed in the delayed keyword group did not result in more effective restudy behavior. Learners in both keyword groups were able to improve their recall performance from their first to their second set of recall tasks, but interestingly, only learners in the immediate keyword group utilized the restudy trial to close knowledge gaps between information, which was stated close to versus distant from the title.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  • Ausubel, D. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R. (2009). Theoretical, conceptual, methodological, and instructional issues in research on metacognition and self-regulated learning: A discussion. Metacognition and Learning, 4(1), 87–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R., & Hadwin, A. F. (2005). Scaffolding self-regulated learning and metacognition: Implicationsfor the design of computer-based scaffolds. Instructional Science, 33, 367–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baddeley, A. D., & Logie, R. H. (1999). Working memory: The multiple-component model. In: A. Miyake, P. Shah (Eds.), Models of Working Memory, (pp. 28–61). Cambridge University Press.

  • Bannert, M. (2007). Metakognition beim Lernen mit Hypermedia. Erfassung, Beschreibung und Vermittlung wirksamer metakognitiver Lernstrategien und Regulationsaktivitäten [Metacognition and learning with hypermedia]. Münster: Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bannert, M. (2009). Promoting self-regulated learning through prompts: A discussion. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 23, 139–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bjork, R. A., & Whitten, W. B. (1974). Recency-sensitive retrieval processes in long-term free recall. Cognitive Psychology, 6(2), 173–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(74)90009-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bortz, J. (1993). Statistik für Sozialwissenschaftler (statistics for social Scientistis). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Britton, B. K., & Gülgöz, S. (1991). Using Kintsch’s computational model to improve instructional text: Effects of repairing inference calls on recall and cognitive structures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 329–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brodie, D. A., & Murdock, B. B. (1977). Effects of presentation time on nominal and functional serial-position curves in free recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16(2), 185–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5371(77)80046-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65, 245–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D., & Stanley, J. (1959). Experimental and quasi-experimental design for research. Skokie: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky, J., & Hertzog, C. (1997). Older and younger adults use a functionally identical algorithm to select items for restudy during multitrial learning. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Science, 52, 178–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky, J., Hertzog, C., Kennedy, M., & Thiede, K. (2005a). The self-monitoring approach for effective learning. Cognitive Technology, 10, 4–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky, J., & Lipko, A. R. (2007). Metacomprehension: A brief history and how to improve its accuracy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(4), 228–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., & Middleton, E. L. (2005b). What constrains the accuracy of metacomprehension judgments? Testing the transfer-appropriate-monitoring and accessibility hypotheses. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 551–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunlosky, J., & Nelson, T. O. (1992). Importance of the kind of cue for judgments of learning (JOLs) and the delayed-JOL effect. Memory & Cognition, 20, 373–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finn, B., & Metcalfe, J. (2008). Judgments of learning are influenced by memory for past test. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 19–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, C. R., van den Broek, P., & Arthur, E. J. (1996). A model of narrative comprehension and recall. In B. K. Britton & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Models of understanding text (pp. 141–164). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frase, L. T., & Kreitzberg, V. S. Effect of topical and indirect learning directions on prose recall. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 320–324.

  • Gagne, R. M. (1969). Context, isolation and interference effects on the retention of prose. Journal of Educational Psychology, 60, 408–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gagne, R.M. & Wiegand, W.K. (1970) The effect of superordinate contexts on learning and retention of facts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 61, 406–409.

  • Gardiner, J. M., Passmore, C., Herriot, P., & Klee, H. (1977). Memory for remembered events: Effects of response mode and response-produced feedback. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 45–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glanzer, M., Fischer, B., & Dorfman, D. (1984). Short-term storage in reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 467–486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graesser, A., McNamara, D., & VanLehn, K. (2005). Scaffolding deep comprehension strategies throughPoint and Query, AutoTutor and iSTART. Educational Psychologist, 40, 225–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groninger, L. D. (1979). Predicting recall: The ‘feeling-that-I-will-know’ phenomenon. American Journal of Psychology, 92, 45–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard, M. W., & Kahana, M. (1999). Contextual variability and serial position effects in free recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition., 25(4), 923–941. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.25.4.923.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, L. L., & Bartz, W. H. (1972). Rehearsal and transfer to LTM. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 561–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, L. L., & Brooks, L. R. (1984). Nonanalytic cognition: Memory, perception and concept learning. In G. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 18, pp. 1–47). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, C. M., & Jacoby, L. L. (1996). Adult egocentrism: Subjective experience versus analytic bases for judgment. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 157–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, C. M., & Lindsay, D. S. (1993). Remembering mistaken for knowing: Ease of retrieval as a basis for confidence in answers to general knowledge questions. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keren, G. (1991). Calibration and probability judgments: Conceptual and methodological issues. Acta Psychologica, 77, 217–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kimball, D. R., & Metcalfe, J. (2003). Delaying judgments of learning affects memory, not metamemory. Memory & Cognition, 31, 918–929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kieras, D. E. (1978). Good and bad structure in simple paragraphs: Effects on apparent theme, reading time, and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 13–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kieras, D. E. (1980). Initial mention as a signal to thematic content in technical passages. Memory and Cognition, 8, 345–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kieras, D. E. (1981). Topicalization effects in cued recall of technical prose. Memory and Cognition, 9, 541–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, J. F., Zechmeister, E. B., & Shaughnessy, J. J. (1980). Judgments of knowing: The influence of retrieval practice. American Journal of Psychology, 93, 329–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W., Welsch, D., Schmalhofer, F., & Zimny, S. (1990). Sentence memory: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 133–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koriat, A. (1993). How do we know that we know? The accessibility model of the feeling of knowing. Psychological Review, 100, 609–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koriat, A. (1994). Memory’s knowledge of its own knowledge: The accessibility account of the feeling of knowing. In J. Metcalfe & P. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 115–135). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koriat, A. (1995). Dissociating knowing and the feeling of knowing: Further evidence for the accessibility model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 311–333.

  • Koriat, A. (1997). Monitoring one’s own knowledge during study: A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 349–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozminsky, E. (1977). Altering comprehension: The effect of biasing titles on text comprehension. Memory & Cognition, 5(4), 482–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lauterman, T. & Ackerman, R. (2013). Overcoming screen inferiority in text learning. In Knauff, M., Pauen, N., Sebanz, & I. Wachsmuth (Eds.) Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (p. 2914–2919). Austin TX: Cognitive Science Society.

  • Lippmann, M., Schwartz, N. H., Jacobson, N. G., Narciss, S. (2019). The concreteness of titles affects metacognition and study motivation. Instructional Science, 47(3), 257–277.

  • Lorch Jr., R. F. (1989). Text-signaling devises and their effects on reading and memory processes. Educational Psychology Review, 1, 209–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorch Jr., R. F., & Lorch, E. P. (1996). Effects of organizational signals on free recall of expository text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 38–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovelace, E. A. (1984). Metamemory: Monitoring future recallability during study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 756–766.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazzoni, G., & Cornoldi, C. (1993). Strategies in study time allocation: Why is study time sometimes not effective? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 47–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazzoni, G., Cornoldi, C., & Marchitelli, G. (1990). Do memorability ratings affect study-time allocation? Memory & Cognition, 18, 196–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazzoni, G., & Nelson, T. O. (1995). Judgments of learning are affected by the kind of encoding in ways that cannot be attributed to the level of recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 1263–1274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mengelkamp, C., & Bannert, M. (2010). Accuracy of confidence judgments: Stability and generality in the learning process and predictive validity for learning outcome. Memory & Cognition, 38(4), 441–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe, J. (2002). Is study time allocated selectively to a region of proximal learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 349–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe, J. (2009). Metacognitive Judgments and Control of Study. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(3), 159–163.

  • Metcalfe, J., & Finn, B. (2008). Evidence that judgments of learning are causally related to study choice. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(1), 174–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, B. J. F. (1975). The organization of prose and its effects on memory. New York: American Elsevier Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, C. C. (1990). Retrieval processes underlying confidence in comprehension judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 223–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. O. (1984). A comparison of current measures of the accuracy of feeling-of-knowing predictions. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 109–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nietfield, J. L., Enders, C. K., & Schraw, G. (2006). A Monte Carlo Comparison of Measures of Relative and Absolute Monitoring Accuracy. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(2).

  • Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 26, pp. 125–173). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nutz, M. (2012). deutsch.werk.4 Sprach- und Lesebuch (German text book for students in grade 8). Leipzig: Ernst Klett Schulbuchverlag Leipzig GmbH.

  • Powers, W. T. (1973). Behavior: The control of perception. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritchey, K., Schuster, J., & Allen, J. (2008). How the relationship between text and headings influences readers‘memory. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 859–874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rovers, S. F., Clarebout, G., Savelberg, H. H., de Bruin, A. B., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2019). Granularity matters: Comparing different ways of measuring self-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning, 14, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadoski, M., Goetz, E. T., & Rodriguez, M. (2000). Engaging texts: Effects of concreteness on comprehensibility, interest, and recall in four text types. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 85–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schallert, D. L. (1967). Improving memory for prose: The relationship between depth of processing and context. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 621–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G. (1995). Measures of Feeling-of-Knowing accuracy: A new look at an old problem. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 321–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G. (2006). Knowledge: Structures and processes. In: Alexander, P. A., Winne, P.H. (Eds.) Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 245–263). New York: Routledge.

  • Schraw, G. (2009). Measuring metacognitive judgments. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of Metacognition in Education (pp. 415–429). New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shuford, E., & Brown, T. A. (1975). Elicitation of personal probabilities and their assessment. Instructional Science, 4(2), 137–188.

  • Thiede, K. W., Anderson, M. C. M., & Therriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(1), 66–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thiede, K. W., Dunlosky, J., Griffin, T. D., & Wiley, J. (2005). Understanding the Delayed-Keyword-Effect on metacomprehension accuracy. Journal of Experimental Psychology, Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(6).

  • Thiede, K. W., Wiley, J., & Griffin, T. D. (2011). Test expectancy affects metacomprehension accuracy. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 264–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomlinson, C., & McTighe, J. (2006). Integrating differentiated instruction and understanding by design. Alexandria: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Broek, P., Risden, K., Fletcher, C. R., & Thurlow, R. (1996). A “landscape” view of reading: Fluctuating patterns of activation and the construction of a stable memory representation. In B. K. Britton & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Models of understanding text (pp. 165–187). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-wolters, B. H. A. M., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1,3–1,114.

  • Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice. The educational psychology series (pp. 277–304). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yates, J. F. (1990). Judgment and decision making. Prentice-Hall, Inc.

  • Zimmerman, B. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Journal of International Research, 45, 166–183.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research was funded by the German Academic Exchange Service / Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst (DAAD), grant number: D/09/45081.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marie Lippmann.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research involving human participants

This research was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the university and country at which this study was conducted. Prior to conducting this research, approval of the university’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) was obtained. Participants volunteered for this research, with the option of extra course credit.

Informed consent and debriefing

Participants provided their informed consent prior to participating in this study. Immediately after participating, participants received a detailed debriefing about this study.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lippmann, M., Danielson, R.W., Schwartz, N.H. et al. Effects of keyword tasks and biasing titles on metacognitive monitoring and recall. Metacognition Learning 16, 233–253 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09246-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09246-4

Keywords

Navigation