145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19169925)
1. An investigation of increases in metamemory confidence across multiple study trials.
Tiede HL; Derksen C; Leboe JP
Memory; 2009 Apr; 17(3):288-300. PubMed ID: 19169925
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Measuring memory monitoring with judgements of retention (JORs).
Tauber SK; Rhodes MG
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2012; 65(7):1376-96. PubMed ID: 22524495
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Metamemory judgments and the benefits of repeated study: improving recall predictions through the activation of appropriate knowledge.
Tiede HL; Leboe JP
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2009 May; 35(3):822-8. PubMed ID: 19379052
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The interplay between value and relatedness as bases for metacognitive monitoring and control: evidence for agenda-based monitoring.
Soderstrom NC; McCabe DP
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2011 Sep; 37(5):1236-42. PubMed ID: 21574750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comprehension as a basis for metacognitive judgments: effects of effort after meaning on recall and metacognition.
Zaromb FM; Karpicke JD; Roediger HL
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2010 Mar; 36(2):552-7. PubMed ID: 20192550
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Metamemory adjustments over time in adults with and without traumatic brain injury.
Krause M; Kennedy MR
Brain Inj; 2009 Nov; 23(12):965-72. PubMed ID: 19831493
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Judgments of learning do not reduce to memory encoding operations: event-related potential evidence for distinct metacognitive processes.
Skavhaug IM; Wilding EL; Donaldson DI
Brain Res; 2010 Mar; 1318():87-95. PubMed ID: 19968975
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The effects of repetition on allocation of study time and judgements of learning in Alzheimer's disease.
Moulin CJ; Perfect TJ; Jones RW
Neuropsychologia; 2000; 38(6):748-56. PubMed ID: 10689050
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Embodiment meets metamemory: weight as a cue for metacognitive judgments.
Alban MW; Kelley CM
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2013 Sep; 39(5):1628-34. PubMed ID: 23565793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Judgments of learning reflect encoding fluency: conclusive evidence for the ease-of-processing hypothesis.
Undorf M; Erdfelder E
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2011 Sep; 37(5):1264-9. PubMed ID: 21574748
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Normative multitrial recall performance, metacognitive judgments, and retrieval latencies for Lithuanian-English paired associates.
Grimaldi PJ; Pyc MA; Rawson KA
Behav Res Methods; 2010 Aug; 42(3):634-42. PubMed ID: 20805585
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Noncriterial recollection influences metacognitive monitoring and control processes.
Brewer GA; Marsh RL; Clark-Foos A; Meeks JT
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2010 Oct; 63(10):1936-42. PubMed ID: 20198538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Aging, encoding fluency, and metacognitive monitoring.
Emanuel Robinson A; Hertzog C; Dunlosky J
Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn; 2006; 13(3-4):458-78. PubMed ID: 16887783
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Do older adults show less confidence in their monitoring of learning?
Serra MJ; Dunlosky J; Hertzog C
Exp Aging Res; 2008; 34(4):379-91. PubMed ID: 18726751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Recollection-based prospective metamemory judgments are more accurate than those based on confidence: judgments of remembering and knowing (JORKS).
McCabe DP; Soderstrom NC
J Exp Psychol Gen; 2011 Nov; 140(4):605-21. PubMed ID: 21707208
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The effects of categorical relatedness on judgements of learning (JOLs).
Matvey G; Dunlosky J; Schwartz BL
Memory; 2006 Feb; 14(2):253-61. PubMed ID: 16484114
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Distinctive items are salient during encoding: delayed judgements of learning predict the isolation effect.
Geraci L; Manzano I
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2010 Jan; 63(1):50-64. PubMed ID: 19370485
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. How many dimensions underlie judgments of learning and recall? Evidence from state-trace methodology.
Jang Y; Nelson TO
J Exp Psychol Gen; 2005 Aug; 134(3):308-26. PubMed ID: 16131266
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Magnitude and accuracy differences between judgements of remembering and forgetting.
Serra MJ; England BD
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove); 2012; 65(11):2231-57. PubMed ID: 22630784
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Set-size and frequency-of-occurrence judgements in young and older adults: the role of the availability heuristic.
Maley JE; Hunt M; Parr W
Q J Exp Psychol A; 2000 Feb; 53(1):247-69. PubMed ID: 10718073
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
