Test Framing Generates a Stability Bias for Predictions of Learning by Causing People to Discount their Learning Beliefs.

People estimate minimal changes in learning when making predictions of learning (POLs) for future study opportunities despite later showing increased performance and an awareness of that increase (Kornell & Bjork, 2009). This phenomenon is conceptualized as a stability bias in judgments about learning. We investigated the malleability of this effect, and whether it reflected people's underlying beliefs about learning. We manipulated prediction framing to emphasize the role of testing vs. studying on memory and directly measured beliefs about multi-trial study effects on learning by having participants construct predicted learning curves before and after the experiment. Mean POLs were more sensitive to the number of study-test opportunities when performance was framed in terms of study benefits rather than testing benefits and POLs reflected pre-existing beliefs about learning. The stability bias is partially due to framing and reflects discounted beliefs about learning benefits rather than inherent belief in the stability of performance.