Current memory theories generally assume that memory performance reflects both recollection and automatic influences of memory. Research on people’s predictions about the likelihood of remembering recently studied information on a memory test, that is, on judgments of learning (JOLs), suggests that both magnitude and resolution of JOLs are linked to recollection. However, it has remained unresolved whether JOLs are also predictive of automatic influences of memory. This issue was addressed in 3 experiments. Using the process-dissociation procedure, we assessed the predictive accuracy of immediate and delayed JOLs (Experiment 1) and of immediate JOLs from a first and from a second study–test cycle (Experiments 2 and 3) for recollection and automatic influences. Results showed that each type of JOLs was predictive of both recollection and automatic influences. Moreover, we found that a delay between study and JOL improved the predictive accuracy of JOLs for recollection, while study–test experience improved the predictive accuracy of JOLs for both recollection and automatic influences. These findings demonstrate that JOLs predict not only recollection, but also automatic influences of memory.
Dieser Eintrag ist Teil der Universitätsbibliographie.
Search Authors in