Does the amount of material to be remembered influence judgements of learning (JOLs)?

Abstract

The current study examined predictions of memory performance as a function of the amount of information to be remembered. In four experiments participants studied and made judgements of learning (JOLs) for long or short lists of words. Results demonstrated that participants provided lower JOLs for long compared with short lists. However, whereas JOLs for short lists strongly corresponded with memory performance, participants' JOLs were consistently overconfident for long lists. Participants were unable to remedy this overconfidence for long lists even when provided information about the list length conditions or warned that a long list of words is difficult to learn. Only when given a prior list learning experience were JOLs for a long list consistent with memory performance. These data indicate that predictions of memory performance are sensitive to the amount of material TBR. However, predictions only correspond with the amount of information to-be-remembered under limited circumstances, providing support for frameworks which suggest that memory predictions are inferential in nature.