Literature DB >> 30411221

Intensifying the intensity illusion in judgments of learning: Modality and cue combinations.

Zehra F Peynircioğlu1, Joshua R Tatz2.   

Abstract

We showed that judgments of learning (JOLs) were not affected by presentation modality in a list-learning task, although the typical font-size and loudness illusions emerged in that large-font visual presentations and loud auditory presentations elicited higher JOLs than their less intense counterparts. Further, when items were presented in both modalities simultaneously, large-font/quiet and small-font/loud items received similar JOLs (and were recalled similarly). Most importantly, when the intensity manipulation was compounded across modalities, the magnitude of the illusion increased beyond that observed in a single modality, showing the influence of combining cues. Whereas recall was still the same, large-font/loud items received higher JOLs than either small-font/loud items or large-font/quiet items, and not-intense items received very low JOLs. These differences emerged only when all conditions were presented within a single list and not in a between-subjects design, underscoring the importance of comparative judgments.

Keywords:  Font size; JOL; Loudness; Memory; Metamemory; Modality

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30411221     DOI: 10.3758/s13421-018-0875-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  18 in total

1.  The effect of text coherence and modality on metamemory judgements.

Authors:  M Carroll; S Korukina
Journal:  Memory       Date:  1999-05

2.  Hearing lips and seeing voices.

Authors:  H McGurk; J MacDonald
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1976 Dec 23-30       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Do you see what I am saying? Exploring visual enhancement of speech comprehension in noisy environments.

Authors:  Lars A Ross; Dave Saint-Amour; Victoria M Leavitt; Daniel C Javitt; John J Foxe
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2006-06-19       Impact factor: 5.357

4.  The modality-match effect in recognition memory.

Authors:  Neil W Mulligan; Katherine Osborn
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.051

5.  Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses.

Authors:  Franz Faul; Edgar Erdfelder; Axel Buchner; Albert-Georg Lang
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2009-11

6.  The effects of list composition and perceptual fluency on judgments of learning (JOLs).

Authors:  Jonathan A Susser; Neil W Mulligan; Miri Besken
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2013-10

7.  Echoic memory and voice quality: recency recall is not enhanced by varying presentation voice.

Authors:  O C Watkins; M J Watkins
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1980-01

8.  Memory predictions are influenced by perceptual information: evidence for metacognitive illusions.

Authors:  Matthew G Rhodes; Alan D Castel
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2008-11

9.  Easily perceived, easily remembered? Perceptual interference produces a double dissociation between metamemory and memory performance.

Authors:  Miri Besken; Neil W Mulligan
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2013-08

10.  Achilles' ear? Inferior human short-term and recognition memory in the auditory modality.

Authors:  James Bigelow; Amy Poremba
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.