个体关于加工流畅性的信念对字体大小效应的影响

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2019.00154

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

本研究考察个体关于加工流畅性的信念对学习判断(Judgment of learning, 简称JOL)的影响, 探讨字体大小效应的产生机制。研究通过两个实验分别考察个体关于“字体大小影响加工流畅性” (实验1)以及“加工流畅性影响记忆效果” (实验2)等信念对字体大小效应的影响。结果发现: 1)当人们相信大字体更流畅(实验1)或者越流畅越好记(实验2)时, 他们在大字体项目上的JOL值显著高于小字体项目上的JOL值; 2)当人们相信小字体更流畅(实验1)或者流畅性与记忆无关(实验2)时, 他们在大字体和小字体项目上的JOL值无显著差异, 字体大小效应消失。上述结果表明, 个体关于加工流畅性的信念是字体大小效应产生的重要原因, 是人们进行学习判断的重要线索。

关键词: 字体大小效应, 学习判断, 关于加工流畅性的信念

Abstract:

The font-size effect refers to the phenomenon by which the judgments of learning (JOLs) are higher for words presented in a larger versus smaller font size. Recently, it has received a great deal of attention in the area of metacognition because the cognitive mechanism of this effect can provide a way to understand how individuals make judgments of learning, which has been a central question in metacognitive monitoring research. So far, there have been two hypotheses about the mechanism underlying this effect: (a) the fluency hypothesis, which claims that JOLs are higher for larger words because they are presumably easier to process and (b) the belief hypothesis, which argues that the font-size effect is caused by people’s beliefs (e.g., beliefs about how font size affects memory). Recently, Mueller and Dunlosky (2017) proposed a new account that the individual’s belief about processing fluency could produce the font-size effect and went on to provide indirect evidence of this. Building on the work of Mueller and Dunlosky, the present study aims to provide direct evidence supporting this idea that beliefs about processing fluency influence the font-size effect. Furthermore, the current study extended the work of Mueller and Dunlosky by splitting the beliefs about processing fluency into two components: the impact of font size on processing fluency and the impact of processing fluency on memory performance.
In this study, we conducted two experiments to investigate the influence of beliefs about processing fluency on the font-size effect via different instructions. Experiment 1 focused on the influence of beliefs about how font size impacts processing fluency on JOLs. Seventy-five participants were randomly assigned to three groups: group 1 received instructions about how the large font words were easier to process, group 2 received instructions about how small font words were easier to process, while the control group did not receive any such instructions. Then, all participants studied word pairs in large (48-point) or small (18-point) font sizes, made JOLs for each word pair and completed a cued-recall test. Experiment 2 focused on the influence of beliefs about how processing fluency impacts memory on JOLs. Eighty-nine participants were randomly assigned to three groups: group 1 received instructions stating that easier processing was positively associated with better memory performance, group 2 received instructions stating that processing fluency was unrelated to memory performance, and the control group did not receive any such instructions. All participants completed tasks similar to experiment 1.
There were two main results. First, JOLs were higher for large fonts when participants were led to believe that the large font was easier to process (group 1 in experiment 1) or the ease of processing was positively related to better memory performance (group 1 in experiment 2). Second, no difference in JOLs was observed when participants were instructed to believe that the small font was processed much more easily (group 2 in experiment 1) or processing fluency was irrelevant to memory performance (group 2 in experiment 2), i.e., there was no font-size effect.
In conclusion, our results provide direct evidence that beliefs about processing fluency can produce the font-size effect, and that they play a vital role in judgments of learning.

Key words: font-size effect, judgments of learning, beliefs about processing fluency

中图分类号:

B842

陈颖, 李锋盈, 李伟健. (2019). 个体关于加工流畅性的信念对字体大小效应的影响. 心理学报, 51(2), 154-162.

CHEN Ying, LI Fengying, LI Weijian. (2019). The influence of learner’s beliefs about processing fluency on font-size effect. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 51(2), 154-162.

图/表 5

参考文献 31

1	Alter, A.L., & Oppenheimer D.M, . ( 2009). Uniting the tribes of fluency to form a metacognitive nation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13( 3), 219-235. doi: 10.1177/1088868309341564 URL
2	Besken, M., & Mulligan N.W, . ( 2013). Easily perceived, easily remembered? Perceptual interference produces a double dissociation between metamemory and memory performance. Memory & Cognition, 41( 6), 897-903.
3	Bjork R. A., Dunlosky J., & Kornell N . ( 2013). Self- regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417-444. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143823 URL
4	Carpenter S. K., Wilford M. M., Kornell N., & Mullaney K. M . ( 2013). Appearances can be deceiving: Instructor fluency increases perceptions of learning without increasing actual learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20( 6), 1350-1356.
5	Dunlosky, J., & Metcalfe J. ( 2009). Metacognition: A textbook of cognition, educational, life span, and applied psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
6	Dunlosky J., Mueller M., & Tauber, S. K .( 2015) . The contribution of processing fluency (and beliefs) to people’s judgments of learning. In D. S. Lindsay, C. M. Kelley, A. P. Yonelinas, & H. L. Roediger, III (Eds.), Remembering: Attributions, processes, and control in human memory: Essays in honor of Larry Jacoby (pp. 46-64). New York: Psychology Press.
7	Dunlosky, J., & Rawson K.A, . ( 2012). Overconfidence produces underachievement: Inaccurate self evaluations undermine students’ learning and retention. Learning and Instruction, 22( 4), 271-280. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.08.003 URL
8	Faul F., Erdfelder E., Lang A., & Buchner A . ( 2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39( 2), 175-191. doi: 10.3758/BF03193146 URL
9	Finn, B., & Tauber S.K, . ( 2015). Erratum to: When confidence is not a signal of knowing: How students’ experiences and beliefs about processing fluency can lead to miscalibrated confidence. Educational Psychology Review, 28( 1), 205-205.
10	Hofer, B.K . ( 1999). Instructional context in the college mathematics classroom: Epistemological beliefs and student motivation. Journal of Staff Program & Organization Development, 16( 2), 73-82.
11	Hu X., Li T., Zheng J., Su N., Liu Z., & Liang L . ( 2015). How much do metamemory beliefs contribute to the font-size effect in judgments of learning? Plos One, 10( 11), e0142351. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0142351 URL
12	Jia X., Li P., Li X., Zhang Y., Cao W., Cao L., & Li W . ( 2016). The effect of word frequency on judgments of learning: Contributions of beliefs and processing fluency. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1995.
13	Koriat, A. ( 2000). The feeling of knowing: Some metatheoretical implications for consciousness and control. Consciousness and Cognition, 9(2), 149-171. doi: 10.1006/ccog.2000.0433 URL
14	Koriat, A. ( 2007). Metacognition and consciousness. In P. D. Zelazo, M. Moscovitch, & E. Thompson (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of consciousness (pp. 289-325). New York: Cambridge University Press.
15	Kornell, N., & Metcalfe J. ( 2006). Study efficacy and the region of proximal learning framework. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32( 3), 609-622. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.32.3.609 URL
16	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. doi: 10.1177/0956797611407929 URL
17	Li T., Hu X., Zheng J., Su N., Liu Z., & Luo L . ( 2016). The influence of visual mental imagery size on metamemory accuracy in judgment of learning. Memory, 25( 2), 244-253.
18	Miele D. B., Finn B., & Molden D. C . ( 2011). Does easily learned mean easily remembered? It depends on your beliefs about intelligence. Psychological Science, 22( 3), 320-324. doi: 10.1177/0956797610397954 URL
19	Mueller, M.L., & Dunlosky J. ( 2017). How beliefs can impact judgments of learning: Evaluating analytic processing theory with beliefs about fluency. Journal of Memory and Language, 93, 245-258. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2016.10.008 URL
20	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? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69( 4), 781-799. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2015.1058404 URL
21	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, 1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2013.09.007 URL
22	Mueller M. L., Tauber S. K., & Dunlosky J . ( 2013). Contributions of beliefs and processing fluency to the effect of relatedness on judgments of learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20( 2),378-384.
23	Nist, S.L., & Holschuh J.P . ( 2005). Practical applications of the research on epistemological beliefs. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 35( 2), 84-92. doi: 10.1080/10790195.2005.10850175 URL
24	Rhodes, M.G., & Castel , . ( 2008). Memory predictions are influenced by perceptual information: Evidence for metacognitive illusions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137( 4), 615-625. doi: 10.1037/a0013684 URL
25	Rouder J. N., Speckman P. L., Sun D., Morey R. D., & Iverson G . ( 2009). Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16( 2), 225-237.
26	Simon, D.A., & Bjork R.A, . ( 2001). Metacognition in motor learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory & Cognition, 27( 4), 907-912.
27	Susser, J.A., & Mulligan N.W, . ( 2015). The effect of motoric fluency on metamemory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22( 4), 1014-1019.
28	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. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.95.1.66 URL
29	Wagenmakers E.-J., Love J., Marsman M., Jamil T., Ly A., Verhagen J., .. van Doorn J . ( 2018). Bayesian inference for psychology. Part II. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25( 1), 58-76.
30	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. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2017.11.005 URL
31	Yue C. L., Castel A. D., & Bjork R. A . ( 2013). When disfluency is—and is not—a desirable difficulty: The influence of typeface clarity on metacognitive judgments and memory. Memory & Cognition, 41( 2), 229-241.

组别	JOL值		回忆正确率
组别	大字体	小字体	大字体	小字体
控制组 (N=25)	45.96±14.04	44.08±13.00	0.39±0.21	0.37±0.22
大字体更流畅组(N=22)	44.97±17.36	40.00±15.40	0.32±0.21	0.34±0.24
小字体更流畅组(N=22)	39.99±15.63	40.20±17.08	0.34±0.22	0.30±0.17

组别	JOL值		回忆正确率
组别	大字体	小字体	大字体	小字体
控制组 (N=25)	45.96±14.04	44.08±13.00	0.39±0.21	0.37±0.22
大字体更流畅组(N=22)	44.97±17.36	40.00±15.40	0.32±0.21	0.34±0.24
小字体更流畅组(N=22)	39.99±15.63	40.20±17.08	0.34±0.22	0.30±0.17

组别	JOL值		回忆正确率
组别	大字体	小字体	大字体	小字体
控制组 (N=23)	39.01±13.55	36.14±12.10	0.36±0.22	0.33±0.19
越流畅越好记组(N=27)	49.40±14.93	40.66±14.49	0.32±0.20	0.29±0.18
流畅性与记忆无关组(N=27)	40.64±20.39	40.36±19.44	0.39±0.25	0.39±0.23

组别	JOL值		回忆正确率
组别	大字体	小字体	大字体	小字体
控制组 (N=23)	39.01±13.55	36.14±12.10	0.36±0.22	0.33±0.19
越流畅越好记组(N=27)	49.40±14.93	40.66±14.49	0.32±0.20	0.29±0.18
流畅性与记忆无关组(N=27)	40.64±20.39	40.36±19.44	0.39±0.25	0.39±0.23

[1]	姜英杰, 马潇潇, 姜元涛, 任吉梅, 龙翼婷. 编码后奖赏影响基于议程的学习：奖赏预期和结果的作用[J]. 心理学报, 2023, 55(4): 542-555.
[2]	赵文博, 姜英杰, 王志伟, 胡竞元. 编码强度对字体大小效应的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2020, 52(10): 1156-1167.
[3]	陈功香, 张承芬,苏雅雯. 延迟学习判断的效应机制[J]. 心理学报, 2010, 42(07): 743-753.
[4]	侯瑞鹤,俞国良. 加工流畅性和提取流畅性与学习不良儿童学习判断的关系[J]. 心理学报, 2008, 40(09): 994-1001.
[5]	张雅明,俞国良. 学习不良儿童元记忆监测与控制的发展[J]. 心理学报, 2007, 39(2): 249-256.
[6]	陈功香,傅小兰. 内外部线索对学习判断的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2003, 35(02): 172-177.