東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

How do Judgments of Intention (JOIs)...

Scheck, Petra Anne.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

How do Judgments of Intention (JOIs) differ from Judgments of Learning (JOLs).

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	How do Judgments of Intention (JOIs) differ from Judgments of Learning (JOLs)./
Author:	Scheck, Petra Anne.
Description:	59 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-12, Section: B, page: 6945.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International66-12B.
Subject:	Psychology, Cognitive. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3202598
ISBN:	9780542477195

How do Judgments of Intention (JOIs) differ from Judgments of Learning (JOLs).
Scheck, Petra Anne.

How do Judgments of Intention (JOIs) differ from Judgments of Learning (JOLs). - 59 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-12, Section: B, page: 6945.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Maryland, College Park, 2006.

The purpose of this research was to investigate whether metacognitive judgments for prospective memory (PM; also called Judgments of Intention - JOIs) differ from judgments of learning (JOLs). Specifically, this researcher tested whether JOIs exhibit the "delayed-JOL effect", in which JOLs made at a delay following study are more accurate predictors of performance than JOLs made immediately following study. Results from the first two experiments showed no delayed-JOI effect. In Experiments 3--5 a time-based paradigm was used to investigate whether the type of judgment prompt might explain this lack of delayed JOI effect. Results suggest that participants are able to make moderately accurate predictions of prospective memory (PM) performance and that delayed JOIs may be more accurate than immediate JOIs when prompted with a cue that does not include either the recognition nor recall target.

ISBN: 9780542477195Subjects--Topical Terms:

1017810
Psychology, Cognitive.

How do Judgments of Intention (JOIs) differ from Judgments of Learning (JOLs).
LDR:01809nmm 2200277 4500 001 1825441
005 20061211074631.5
008 130610s2006 eng d
020 $a 9780542477195
035 $a (UnM)AAI3202598
035 $a AAI3202598
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 1 $a Scheck, Petra Anne. $3 1914449
245 1 0 $a How do Judgments of Intention (JOIs) differ from Judgments of Learning (JOLs).
300 $a 59 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-12, Section: B, page: 6945.
500 $a Chair: Thomas S. Wallsten.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Maryland, College Park, 2006.
520 $a The purpose of this research was to investigate whether metacognitive judgments for prospective memory (PM; also called Judgments of Intention - JOIs) differ from judgments of learning (JOLs). Specifically, this researcher tested whether JOIs exhibit the "delayed-JOL effect", in which JOLs made at a delay following study are more accurate predictors of performance than JOLs made immediately following study. Results from the first two experiments showed no delayed-JOI effect. In Experiments 3--5 a time-based paradigm was used to investigate whether the type of judgment prompt might explain this lack of delayed JOI effect. Results suggest that participants are able to make moderately accurate predictions of prospective memory (PM) performance and that delayed JOIs may be more accurate than immediate JOIs when prompted with a cue that does not include either the recognition nor recall target.
590 $a School code: 0117.
650 4 $a Psychology, Cognitive. $3 1017810
650 4 $a Psychology, Experimental. $3 517106
690 $a 0633
690 $a 0623
710 2 0 $a University of Maryland, College Park. $3 657686
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 66-12B.
790 1 0 $a Wallsten, Thomas S., $e advisor
790 $a 0117
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2006
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3202598