References
- Koriat, A. (1997). Monitoring one's own knowledge during study: A cue-utilization approach to judgments of learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 349-370.
- Koriat, A., & Levy-Sadot, R. (2001). The combined contributions of the cue-familiarity and accessibility heuristics to feelings of knowing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 27, 34-53.
- Maki, R. H. (1998). Test predictions over text material. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 117-144). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Connor, L. T., Dunlosky, J., & Hertzog, C. (1997). Age-related differences in absolute but not relative metamemory accuracy. Psychology and Aging, 12, 50-71.
- Dunlosky, J., & Nelson, T. O. (1994). Does the sensitivity of judgments of learning (JOLs) to the effects of various study activities depend on when the JOLs occur? Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 545-565.
- Kelemen, W. L., & Weaver, C. A., III. (1997). Enhanced metamemory at delays: Why do judgments of learning improve over time? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 23, 1394-1409.
- Keren, G. (1991). Calibration and probability judgments: Conceptual and methodological issues. Acta Psychologica, 77, 217-273.
- Mazzoni, G., & Nelson, T. O. (1995). Judgments of learning are affected by the kind of encoding in ways that cannot be attributed to the level of recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 1263-1274.
- Nelson, T. O. (1984). A comparison of current measures of the accuracy of feeling-of-knowing predictions. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 109-133.
- Nelson, T. O., & Dunlosky, J. (1991). When people's judgments of learning (JOLs) are extremely accurate at predicting subsequent recall: The "delayed-JOL effect:" Psychological Science, 2, 267-270.
- Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 26, pp. 125-173). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
- Nelson, T. O., Narens, L., & Dunlosky, J. (2004). A revised methodology for research on metamemory: Pre-judgment recall and monitoring (PRAM). Psychological Methods, 9, 53-69.
- Schwartz, B. L. (1994). Sources of information in metamemory: Judgments of learning and feelings of knowing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 357-375.
- Thiede, K. W. (1999). The importance of monitoring and self-regulation during multitrial learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 662-667.
- Vernon, D., & Usher, M. (2003). Dynamics of metacognitive judgments: Pre- and post-retrieval mechanisms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 29, 339-346.
- Wallsten, T. S. (1996). An analysis of judgment research analyses. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65, 220-226.
- Weaver, C. A., III, & Kelemen, W. L. (1997). Judgments of learning at delays: Shifts in response patterns or increased metamemory accuracy? Psychological Science, 8, 318-321.
- Begg, I., Duft, S., Lalonde, P., Melnick, R., & Sanvito, J. (1989). Memory predictions are based on ease of processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 610-632.
- Benjamin, A. S., Bjork, R. A., & Schwartz, B. L. (1998). The mismeasure of memory: When retrieval fluency is misleading as a metamnemonic index. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 55-68.