Article in Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition · March 2005:
This paper explores the phenomenon where students overestimate their understanding of material, leading to an illusion of competence, particularly when studying paired-associates tasks (tasks where a cue is paired with a target). During study, learners often judge their knowledge (Judgments of Learning, JOLs) with the answer present, which creates a bias; they find it difficult to predict their performance on tests where the answer is not provided.
This discrepancy between study and test conditions can lead to overconfidence in their recall abilities, which often proves inaccurate during testing. The authors highlight that while overall judgments of learning are generally well-calibrated, item-by-item assessments tend to overestimate performance more than aggregate judgments.
This paper explores the phenomenon where students overestimate their understanding of material, leading to an illusion of competence, particularly when studying paired-associates tasks (tasks where a cue is paired with a target). During study, learners often judge their knowledge (Judgments of Learning, JOLs) with the answer present, which creates a bias; they find it difficult to predict their performance on tests where the answer is not provided.
This discrepancy between study and test conditions can lead to overconfidence in their recall abilities, which often proves inaccurate during testing. The authors highlight that while overall judgments of learning are generally well-calibrated, item-by-item assessments tend to overestimate performance more than aggregate judgments.
