延迟学习判断研究的发展与展望

延迟学习判断是学习判断的一种形式,是指在材料学习完以后间隔一段时间才发生的学习判断。在与即时学习判断的对比研究中发现,延迟学习判断具有较高的相对准确性,这种现象被称为延迟学习判断效应。研究者进行了大量的研究并提出了多种理论来解释这种延迟学习判断效应。随着研究的不断深入,延迟学习判断的研究从研究指标、研究方法甚至是研究的理论基础都在不断更新。延迟学习判断的研究进展,包括主要理论和相关实验,以及最新研究成果将被介绍。最后,文章梳理了延迟JOL的研究进程,并指出了未来的研究方向。     

不同回忆任务下小学生即时学习判断的准确性

学习判断是指对当前已经学习的项目在以后测验中成绩的预见性判断。本研究以小学五年级学生为被试,选取正向词对和反向词对为实验材料,考察不同回忆任务下小学生学习判断的准确性及偏差。研究发现,小学五年级学生的即时学习判断的准确性受到词对类型和回忆任务的影响:(1)小学生线索回忆任务下的学习判断中,正向词对的准确性较好,反向词对出现了高估,表现出了学习判断的预见偏差;(2)自由回忆任务下的学习判断中,两种词对都出现了显著的高估。研究结果丰富和细化了流畅性假说对学习判断加工机制的解释,并提出即时学习判断准确性的偏差是由于编码流畅性和提取流畅性的差异造成的。     

学习判断准确性的研究方法

学习判断是元认知判断的一种重要形式,是指被试对其后测成绩的预测.准确性是学习判断研究的重要问题.学习判断准确性分为绝对准确性和相对准确性.本文重点介绍相对准确性的传统研究方法和修正方法,即预测前回忆和监测法.在比较两种相对准确性的研究方法在数据的收集和分析上的差别,提出传统方法在数据收集过程中只能通过假设推断学习判断判断前的提取过程,修正方法在数据收集时,在学习判断前插入一个回忆阶段,可以监测学习判断判断前的提取过程.应用修正方法使研究者既可分解总的准确性,又可通过加权平均数的算法合成总的准确性.因此该方法有助于研究者更加深入、精确地研究学习判断以及其他元认知判断问题.     

内外部线索对不同类型学习判断的影响

以Koriat的线索模型理论为基础,在前人研究的基础上探讨两种学习判断的差异,并进一步考察内外部线索对即时学习判断和延迟学习判断的不同影响。研究结果发现：（1）延迟学习判断的相对准确性显著高于即时学习判断,验证了延迟学习判断效应的存在。（2）不同的线索类型对学习判断的影响不同,学习判断对内部线索更加敏感。（3）相同的线索在不同的学习判断条件下影响不同。（4）即时学习判断条件下的JOL值分布呈现逐渐上升的趋势;延迟学习判断条件下的JOL值分布呈“U”型曲线。     

小学高年级学生学习判断的发展

以小学高年级学生为被试,采用联结学习任务,考察该年龄阶段学生的学习判断能力的发展和年龄特点,同时分析学习判断能力出现年龄差异的原因,以及该年龄阶段学生的学习判断绝对准确性的延迟学习判断效应。实验结果表明:小学高年级学生即时逐项学习判断绝对准确性存在年龄差异,其发展趋势是随年龄增长而提高的,存在年龄差异的原因是判断依据的线索不同。小学高年级学生的逐项学习判断绝对准确性出现延迟学习判断效应。     

学习和测验经验对学习判断中UWP效应的影响

针对重复学习判断中出现的练习伴随低估效应（UWP效应）,目前存在多种理论解释。本研究基于过去测验记忆假说,在学习阶段和测验阶段引入两种判断：学习判断准确性的判断和回溯性信心判断,通过两个实验考察学习经验和测验经验对UWP效应的影响。结果发现：在学习判断中学习判断准确性的判断和回溯性信心判断均消除了UWP效应,间接证明了学习和测验经验均影响到UWP效应的出现。     

间隔学习与测试效应对学习判断的影响

文章两个实验用于研究间隔学习和测试效应对即刻学习判断及其准确性的影响,结果表明：（1）间隔学习促进记忆保持力,降低即刻学习判断中对困难学习材料的高估并提高学习判断相对准确性。（2）重学前预测试具有增强记忆痕迹的功能,在间隔学习的基础上显著提高了学习判断相对准确性。（3）外部线索应当区分,间隔学习和预测试属于不同的外部线索。     

情绪状态对学习判断的影响及其机制

两个实验用于研究情绪对学习判断的影响及其机制,结果表明：（1）首轮回忆测验成绩可以通过影响个体的情绪状态来影响后继的学习判断以及回忆测验和学习判断的绝对准确性。（2）情绪可以影响学习判断和个体对学习内容的加工深度,加工深度的提高有利于个体的回忆成绩,学习判断和回忆成绩共同影响着学习判断的准确性。     

学习判断与学习时间分配的关系

学习判断与学习时间分配的关系是元认知领域的重要问题, 对学习判断的研究在于使个体了解自己的学习和记忆活动, 从而有效控制学习过程, 合理分配学习时间, 这是元记忆监测影响控制的典型例子。近来有研究者提出学习时间分配不仅表现控制功能, 而且还表现监测功能。于是围绕学习时间的双重功能, 他们提出了元记忆监测与控制至少存在两种关系模型—— MC(监测影响控制)模型和CM(控制影响监测)模型, 后来又提出了两模型相互协同作用的合并动态模型—— 连续波浪型模式和同时发生模型。未来的研究应在继续验证MC模型和完善CM模型的基础上, 尝试检验两模型的合并动态模型。     

词频对学习判断的影响

该研究通过自定步速的联结学习任务,考察在学习高频词对和低频词对时即时学习判断的绝对准确性,以及学习判断准确性与回忆成绩的相关。实验结果显示:(1)即时学习判断等级与回忆成绩存在显著差异,即时学习判断在预测回忆成绩时出现显著的高估;(2)词频对高估程度有显著影响,高频词对的高估程度大于低频词对;(3)不论是高频词对还是低频词对,学习判断准确性与回忆成绩都有高相关,验证了元记忆假设。     

学习判断的练习伴随低估效应

学习判断是元认知判断的一种重要形式,是个体对随后的记忆成绩的预测。当个体在多次学习－测验任务中学习词对时,学习判断出现了练习伴随低估效应。研究者对此进行了大量的实验并提出了多种理论,如线索应用模型,提取流畅性假说和基点－校正假说。但是,Koriat等人通过分析发现练习伴随低估效应可能不是单一因素作用的结果,而是多种效应共同影响作用的表现,并由此提出了记忆去偏差假说。文章指出了目前研究中还存在的问题以及未来研究的方向     

Certainty and Uncertainty: The Two Faces of the Hindsight Bias

“Hindsight Bias” is a person's tendency, after learning about the actual outcome of a situation or the correct answer to a question, to distort a previous judgment in the direction of this new information. In the literature, hindsight bias has been mostly discussed as an inevitable result of a “judgment under uncertainty.” We think that the hindsight bias is due to memorial as well as inferential processes: Whereas certainty about the recollection is memorial and concerns the recollective experience, certainty at the time of the judgment is inferential and concerns the individual's metaknowledge (“I know that I knew that”). In two experiments participants' feelings of certainty were measured indirectly (Koriat & Goldsmith, 1996) by giving participants the option of leaving those questions unanswered about which they felt uncertain. This free-report option was offered to half of the participants in the first estimate phase (concerning time of judgment) and to the second half in the memory phase (concerning the recollective experience). At the end of the session, participants were presented again with the questions they had skipped and were now required to answer them. This procedure allowed us to compare the amount of hindsight bias for the skipped, uncertain items to the spontaneously answered, certain ones. Both experiments demonstrated that the hindsight bias is a result of the interaction of both uncertainty and certainty.     

重复学习判断中的低自信效应

学习判断是元认知判断的一种重要形式,是对未来回忆成绩的预测。重复学习判断中的低自信效应是一个有趣而反常的现象,指在重复学习测验中,学习判断往往低估了回忆成绩的增加,出现低自信的一种现象。目前,大部分实验证据支持重复学习判断中的低自信效应是普遍存在的,但也有一些实验结果表明该效应是受一定条件限制的。对于这种低自信效应的作用机制,研究者提出了不同的理论模型（如,锚定调整假说、记忆偏向消除理论、过去测验记忆的启发式假说等）进行了深入探讨。最后,文章还指出了此领域现有研究的局限和有待研究的问题     

Strategic regulation of grain size in memory reporting

To increase their report accuracy, rememberers may either withhold information that they feel unsure about or provide relatively coarse information that is unlikely to be wrong. In previous work (A. Koriat & M. Goldsmith, 1996c), the authors delineated the metacognitive monitoring and control processes underlying the decision to volunteer or withhold particular items of information (report option) and examined how these processes are used in the strategic regulation of memory accuracy. This article adapts that framework to address control over the grain size (precision-coarseness) of the information that people report. Results show that rememberers strategically regulate the grain of their answers to accommodate the competing goals of accuracy and informativeness. The metacognitive processes underlying this regulation are elucidated.     

Understanding the coherence of the severity effect and optimism phenomena: Lessons from attention

Claims that optimism is a near-universal characteristic of human judgment seem to be at odds with recent results from the judgment and decision making literature suggesting that the likelihood of negative outcomes are overestimated relative to neutral outcomes. In an attempt to reconcile these seemingly contrasting phenomena, inspiration is drawn from the attention literature in which there is evidence that both positive and negative stimuli can have attentional privilege relative to neutral stimuli. This result provides a framework within which I consider three example phenomena that purport to demonstrate that people’s likelihood estimates are optimistic: Wishful thinking; Unrealistic comparative optimism and Asymmetric belief updating. The framework clarifies the relationships between these phenomena and stimulates future research questions. Generally, whilst results from the first two phenomena appear reconcilable in this conceptualisation, further research is required in reconciling the third.     

即刻学习判断的系列位置效应：内外部线索的影响

为了检验即刻学习判断对内外部线索的敏感性,实验一被试为22名高中生,材料为三列含15个词语的清单,先逐个呈现词语系列位置信息,被试在学习前进行即刻学习判断,结果发现学习判断有显著首因效应,表明学习判断对系列位置信息这一外部线索比较敏感。实验二被试为20名高中生,先逐个呈现词语系列位置信息,被试在学习后进行即刻学习判断,结果发现学习判断同样有显著首因效应,表明学习判断对内部线索的敏感性并未强于外部线索。     

Are Causal Structure and Intervention Judgments Inextricably Linked? A Developmental Study

The application of the formal framework of causal Bayesian Networks to children’s causal learning provides the motivation to examine the link between judgments about the causal structure of a system, and the ability to make inferences about interventions on components of the system. Three experiments examined whether children are able to make correct inferences about interventions on different causal structures. The first two experiments examined whether children’s causal structure and intervention judgments were consistent with one another. In Experiment 1, children aged between 4 and 8 years made causal structure judgments on a three‐component causal system followed by counterfactual intervention judgments. In Experiment 2, children’s causal structure judgments were followed by intervention judgments phrased as future hypotheticals. In Experiment 3, we explicitly told children what the correct causal structure was and asked them to make intervention judgments. The results of the three experiments suggest that the representations that support causal structure judgments do not easily support simple judgments about interventions in children. We discuss our findings in light of strong interventionist claims that the two types of judgments should be closely linked.