ISSN 0439-755X
CN 11-1911/B
主办:中国心理学会
   中国科学院心理研究所
出版:科学出版社

心理学报 ›› 2010, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (07): 743-753.

• • 上一篇    下一篇

延迟学习判断的效应机制

陈功香; 张承芬;苏雅雯   

  1. (1济南大学教育与心理科学学院, 济南 250022) (2中国煤炭地质总局水文地质局, 邯郸 056004)
  • 收稿日期:2009-05-14 修回日期:1900-01-01 发布日期:2010-07-30 出版日期:2010-07-30
  • 通讯作者: 陈功香

Mechanism of Delayed-JOL Effect

CHEN Gong-Xiang;ZHANG Cheng-Fen;SU Ya-Wen   

  1. (1 School of Education & Psychology, University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, China)
    (2 Hydrogeology Bureau of CNACG, Handan 056004, China)
  • Received:2009-05-14 Revised:1900-01-01 Online:2010-07-30 Published:2010-07-30
  • Contact: CHEN Gong-Xiang

摘要: 研究考察了延迟学习判断的记忆假说和元记忆假说。实验一通过插入预测试的方法, 消除即时学习判断与延迟学习判断在记忆方面的差异, 结果发现, 延迟学习判断的准确性显著高于插入预测试的即时学习判断的准确性, 说明延迟学习判断的确提高了元记忆水平; 实验二采用PRAM实验程序, 对元记忆假说的机制进行探讨, 结果发现, 加入干扰任务的即时学习判断排除短时记忆的程度远远低于延迟学习判断干扰, 说明学习判断的准确性与短时记忆干扰的排除程度有关, 短时记忆干扰越强, 学习判断的准确性 越低。

关键词: 延迟学习判断效应, 记忆假说, 元记忆假说, 双重记忆监测假说

Abstract: There are two kinds of hypotheses regarding to delayed judgment of learning (JOL) effect, which are memory hypothesis and metamemory hypothesis. Two experiments were conducted to investigate the controversy between memory hypothesis and metamemory hypothesis, and the mechanism of monitoring-dual-memories hypothesis (MDM, Nelson & Dunlosky, 1991), respectively.
Both the memory hypothesis and the metamemory hypothesis acknowledge that the accuracy of JOL increases when in delayed-JOL condition than in immediate-JOL condition. However, the explanation of these two hypotheses on the mechanism of this phenomenon differs substantially. The metamemory hypothesis believes that delayed-JOL effect is duo to improvement in metamemory, while the memory hypothesis supposes that delayed-JOL simply affects memory, not metamemory. We believed that these two hypotheses are not either-or. Namely, delayed-JOL affects memory as well as metamemory.
In the first experiment, we removed the memorial difference between delayed-JOL and immediate-JOL by setting in a preliminary test between JOL and final test. The results showed that the memory scores in immediate-JOL condition and delayed-JOL condition had no significant difference. However, the accuracy of delayed-JOL was substantially high than the accuracy of immediate-JOL in a preliminary test. This result confirmed that the delayed-JOL indeed improved the accuracy of metamemory, it affected memory as well as metamemory.
Now that we have proved that the delayed-JOL improved metamemory in the first experiment, we continued to study the mechanism of this improvement in the second experiment. There are three types of metamemory hypotheses, MDM hypothesis is most influential and controversial. There are many researches supported this hypothesis, but Kelemen and Weaver′s (1997) study challenged it. However, they can only determine the removement of short-term memory (STM) through theoretical speculation in traditional experimental procedure, whether the STM was removed or not and the extent of removement could not be measured. We could observe the score of pre-judgment recall by using PRAM method. The results of experiment showed that the distractive assignment could not remove STM effectively. We found that the accuracy of JOL was related to the removement of STM through correlation analysis. The accuracy improved with the extent of removement of STM. So we believed that the delayed-JOL effect was duo to removement of STM thoroughly. Our study confirmed as well as extended the MDM hypothesis.

Key words: delayed-JOL effect, memory hypothesis, metamemory hypothesis, monitoring-dual-memories hypothesis