| Metacognition refers to our knowledge and awareness of our own memory processes, including the ability to monitor and control the learning process. It is always related to memory. Bjork(2011) pointed out that often conditions that produce forgetting enable new learning, whereas learning or retrieving some things could contribute to forgetting of other things.Research on metacognitive judgment mainly through perceptual fluency operation, the study found that the flow is not always a necessary difficulty. Desirable difficulty was put forward by Bjork, think that when change the perceptual learning materials properties(such as font rendering method), can improve the learning and maintain long-term memory. The necessary difficult to make people realize the fluency in machining material, so as to guide people to study materials more cognitive processing, more sophisticated cognitive encoding, thus improve the memory performance. Perceptual disfluency is not universally a desirable difficulty. While some types of disfluency may be desirable, such as presenting textual information in an unusual or distinctive font, visual distortions, such as blurred or out-of-focus text, can potentially impair learning. Existing studies have found that the fluency influenced judgment of learning, but did not affect the recall, and fluency comes mainly from the gap between the subjective experience in the process of learning and the expected difficulty(Whittlesea, 2001). We divide the difficulty into two kinds, one kind is desirable difficulty, one is the real difficulty, and discuss the influence on metacognitive judgment. This article assumes that influence of the disfluency on learning judgment is a kind of surface processing, and perceptual fluency mainly influence judgment of learning, does not affect recall, whereas the real difficulty about material itself will affect memory performance, as well as judgment of learning.On the basis of prior research, this study included three experiments. In Experiment 1, we joined different cues, and in the item-method directional forgetting paradigm, and we assume JOLs for TBR items is higher than TBF items, JOLs for clear items is higher than blurred items, as well as recall. Results showed that only the cues significantly affect JOLs and recall, and for TBR items, disfluency items were given lower JOLs than fluency items, but there is no significant different in TBF items, and the blur and the clear words does not affect JOL, this may because the cues eliminate the influence of clarity. In experiment 2, based on the study by Carole, Castel and Bjork(2013), we controlled the time interval, and continue to explore whether the disfluency as desirable difficulty. We found interval did not effect JOL and recall, the participants focus on the instructions and experiment purpose, and proved the cues actually eliminate the influence of clarity on JOL. In experiment 3, we use different words type to discusses how the meaning of words influence JOL, and assume both word type and clues impact JOL, sense words for JOLs is higher than nonsense words, and no matter for TBR or TBF items, the sense words were recalled better than nonsense words. Results found that both word type and clues affect JOL, the performance was no significant difference for TBR items, whereas the sense word pairs is significantly higher than the nonsense word pairs, the clues and words type affected JOL and memory. |
