Perceptual contrast reduces the judgments of learning of small-font words and increases the judgments of learning of large-font words compared with the no-contrast conditions.
font size
judgments of learning
memory
perceptual contrast
Journal
PsyCh journal
ISSN: 2046-0260
Titre abrégé: Psych J
Pays: Australia
ID NLM: 101598595
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2023
Oct 2023
Historique:
received:
11
11
2022
accepted:
05
07
2023
medline:
23
10
2023
pubmed:
8
9
2023
entrez:
8
9
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The font-size effect on judgments of learning (JOLs) refers to large-font words being rated as more memorable than small ones when required to predict memory performance during the study phase. This study examines perceptual contrast as the prerequisite for this font-size effect on JOLs and explores how perceptual contrast leads to this effect. In Experiment 1, perceptual contrast was achieved by inserting words with one font (e.g., 18 pt) into a series of words with another font (e.g., 70 pt) at a particular proportion (1:4). In Experiment 2, perceptual contrast was manipulated by presenting two different font words up and down in a pair. The results of both experiments showed that: (1) participants rated higher JOLs for large than small fonts under the contrast conditions, but the JOL difference between the two fonts was not significant under the no-contrast conditions; (2) the JOLs of small-font words under the contrast conditions was reduced compared with the no-contrast conditions, but the JOLs of large-font words under the contrast conditions was increased compared with the no-contrast conditions. These results indicated that perceptual contrast was the prerequisite for the font-size effect on JOLs. The reason for this effect is that, compared to no-contrast conditions, perceptual contrast reduces the JOLs of small-font words while increasing the JOLs of large-font words. This study may deepen researchers' understanding of the mechanism of the font-size effect on JOLs and help educators effectively guide students to learn.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
670-679Subventions
Organisme : National Office for Philosophy and Social Sciences
ID : 16CSH047
Informations de copyright
© 2023 Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
Références
Alban, M. W., & Kelley, C. M. (2013). Embodiment meets metamemory: Weight as a cue for metacognitive judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(5), 1628-1634. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032420
Ariel, R., Price, J., & Hertzog, C. (2015). Age-related associative memory deficits in value-based remembering: The contribution of agenda-based regulation and strategy use. Psychology and Aging, 30(4), 795-808. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039818
Bayer, M., Smmer, W., & Schacht, A. (2012). Font size matters-emotion and attention in cortical responses to written words. PLoS One, 7(5), e36042. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036042
Bianchi, R. G., Rodrigues, K. R. H., & Neris, V. P. A. (2021). Emotional responses to font types and sizes in web pages. Proceedings of the XX Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems https://doi.org/10.1145/3472301.3484325
Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64(1), 417-444. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143823
Blake, A. B., & Castel, A. D. (2018). On belief and fluency in the construction of judgments of learning: Assessing and altering the direct effects of belief. Acta Psychologica, 186, 27-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2018.04.004
Brysbaert, M. (2019). How many participants do we have to include in properly powered experiments? A tutorial of power analysis with reference tables. Journal of Cognition, 2(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.72
Chang, M., & Brainerd, C. J. (2022). Association and dissociation between judgments of learning and memory: A meta-analysis of the font size effect. Metacognition and Learning, 17(2), 443-476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-021-09287-3
Dunlosky, J., Hunt, R. R., & Clark, E. (2000). Is perceptual salience needed in explanations of the isolation effect? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26(3), 649-657. https://doi.org/10.1037//0278-7393.26.3.649
Dunlosky, J., & Matvey, G. (2001). Empirical analysis of the intrinsic-extrinsic distinction of judgments of learning (JOLs): Effects of relatedness and serial position on JOLs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(5), 1180-1191. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.5.1180
Fan, T., Zheng, J., Hu, X., Su, N., Yin, Y., Yang, C., & Luo, L. (2021). The contribution of metamemory beliefs to the font size effect on judgments of learning: Is word frequency a moderating factor? PLoS One, 16(9), e0257547. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0257547
Geraci, L., & Manzano, I. (2010). Distinctive items are salient during encoding: Delayed judgements of learning predict the isolation effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(1), 50-64. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210902790161
Halamish, V. (2018). Can very small font size enhance memory? Memory & Cognition, 46(6), 979-993. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-018-0816-6
Helson, H. (1964). Adaptation-level theory: An experimental and systematic approach to behavior. Harper and Row.
Hu, X., Li, T., Zheng, J., Su, N., Liu, Z., & Luo, L. (2015). How much do metamemory beliefs contribute to the font-size effect in judgments of learning? PLoS One, 10(11), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0142351
Karpicke, J. D. (2009). Metacognitive control and strategy selection: Deciding to practice retrieval during learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138(4), 469-486. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017341
Koriat, A. (1997). Monitoring one's own knowledge during study: A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126(4), 349-370. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.126.4.349
Koriat, A., Bjork, R. A., Sheffer, L., & Bar, S. K. (2004). Predicting one's own forgetting: The role of experience-based and theory-based processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133(4), 643-656. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.133.4.643
Kornell, N., Rhodes, M. G., Castel, A. D., & Tauber, S. K. (2011). The ease-of-processing heuristic and the stability bias: Dissociating memory, memory beliefs, and memory judgments. Psychological Science, 22(6), 787-794. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611407929
Luna, K., Martín-Luengo, B., & Albuquerque, P. B. (2018). Do delayed judgments of learning reduce metamemory illusions? A meta-analysis. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (Hove), 71(7), 1626-1636. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2017.1343362
Luna, K., Nogueira, M., & Albuquerque, P. B. (2019). Words in larger font are perceived as more important: Explaining the belief that font size affects memory. Memory, 27(4), 555-560. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2018.1529797
McDonough, I. M., & Gallo, D. A. (2012). Illusory expectations can affect retrieval-monitoring accuracy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(2), 391-404. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025548
Metcalfe, J., & Finn, B. (2008). Evidence that judgments of learning are causally related to study choice. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(1), 174-179. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.1.174
Metcalfe, J., & Kornell, N. (2005). A region of proximal learning model of study time allocation. Journal of Memory and Language, 52(4), 463-477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2004.12.001
Mueller, M. L., Dunlosky, J., & Tauber, S. K. (2016). The effect of identical word pairs on people's metamemory judgments: What are the contributions of processing fluency and beliefs about memory? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69(4), 781-799. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2015.1058404
Mueller, M. L., Dunlosky, J., Tauber, S. K., & Rhodes, M. G. (2014). The font-size effect on judgments of learning: Does it exemplify fluency effects or reflect people's beliefs about memory? Journal of Memory and Language, 70(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2013.09.007
Murphy, D. H., Huckins, S. C., Rhodes, M. G., & Castel, A. D. (2022). The effect of perceptual processing fluency and value on metacognition and remembering. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 29(3), 910-921. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-021-02030-8
Nelson, T. O. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 26, pp. 125-173). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60053-5
Nguyen, L. T., Marini, F., Zacharczuk, L., Llano, D. A., & Mudar, R. A. (2019). Theta and alpha band oscillations during value-directed strategic processing. Behavioural Brain Research, 367, 210-214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2019.03.052
Otani, H., Von Glahn, N. R., Libkuman, T. M., Goernert, P. N., & Kato, K. (2014). Emotional salience and the isolation effect. The Journal of General Psychology, 141(1), 35-46. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2013.848180
Peynircioğlu, Z. F., & Tatz, J. R. (2019). Intensifying the intensity illusion in judgments of learning: Modality and cue combinations. Memory & Cognition, 47(3), 412-419. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-018-0875-8
Pfabigan, D. M., Sailer, U., & Lamm, C. (2015). Size does matter! Perceptual stimulus properties affect event-related potentials during feedback processing. Psychophysiology, 52(9), 1238-1247. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12458
Price, J., & Harrison, A. (2017). Examining what prestudy and immediate judgments of learning reveal about the bases of metamemory judgments. Journal of Memory and Language, 94, 177-194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2016.12.003
Rhodes, M. G., & Castel, A. D. (2008). Memory predictions are influenced by perceptual information: Evidence for metacognitive illusions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137(4), 615-625. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013684
Rhodes, M. G., & Castel, A. D. (2009). Metacognitive illusions for auditory information: Effects on monitoring and control. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(3), 550-554. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.3.550
Smith, R. E., & Hunt, R. R. (2016). Distinctive processing in young and older adults: Metacognitive judgments and the isolation paradigm. Psychology and Aging, 31(2), 198-209. https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000076
Soderstrom, N. C., & McCabe, D. P. (2011). The interplay between value and relatedness as bases for metacognitive monitoring and control: Evidence for agenda-based monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(5), 1236-1242. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023548
Su, N., Li, T., Zheng, J., Hu, X., Fan, T., & Luo, L. (2018). How font size affects judgments of learning: Simultaneous mediating effect of item-specific beliefs about fluency and moderating effect of beliefs about font size and memory. PLoS One, 13(7), e0200888. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0200888
Susser, J. A., Mulligan, N. W., & Besken, M. (2013). The effects of list composition and perceptual fluency on judgments of learning (JOLs). Memory & Cognition, 41(7), 1000-1011. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-013-0323-8
Tatz, J. R., & Peynircioğlu, Z. F. (2020). Judgments of learning in context: Backgrounds can both reduce and produce metamemory illusions. Memory & Cognition, 48(4), 581-595. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-019-00991-9
Tatz, J. R., Undorf, M., & Peynircioğlu, Z. F. (2021). Effect of impoverished information on multisensory integration in judgments of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 47(3), 481-497. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000953
Tsonos, D., & Kouroupetroglou, G. (2016). Prosodic mapping of text font based on the dimensional theory of emotions: A case study on style and size. Eurasip Journal on Audio Speech & Music Processing, 8, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13636-016-0087-8
Undorf, M., & Ackerman, R. (2017). The puzzle of study time allocation for the most challenging items. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(6), 2003-2011. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1261-4
Undorf, M., Söllner, A., & Bröder, A. (2018). Simultaneous utilization of multiple cues in judgments of learning. Memory & Cognition, 46(2), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-017-0780-6
Undorf, M., & Zimdahl, M. F. (2019). Metamemory and memory for a wide range of font sizes: What is the contribution of perceptual fluency? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory, and Cognition, 45(1), 97-109. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000571
Undorf, M., Zimdahl, M. F., & Bernstein, D. M. (2017). Perceptual fluency contributes to effects of stimulus size on judgments of learning. Journal of Memory and Language, 92, 293-304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2016.07.003
von Restorff, H. (1933). Über die Wirkung von Bereichsbildungen im Spurenfeld [On the effects of the formation of a structure in the trace field]. Psychologische Forschung, 18, 299-342. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02409636
Wang, Z., Yang, C., Zhao, W., & Jiang, Y. (2020). Perceptual fluency affects judgments of learning non-analytically and analytically through beliefs about how perceptual fluency affects memory. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 552824. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.552824
Yang, C., Huang, T. S. T., & Shanks, D. R. (2018). Perceptual fluency affects judgments of learning: The font size effect. Journal of Memory and Language, 99, 99-110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2017.11.005
Zawadzka, K., & Higham, P. A. (2016). Recalibration effects in judgments of learning: A signal detection analysis. Journal of Memory and Language, 90, 161-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2016.04.005