Submission 119
Judgments of Remembering and Knowing (JORKs): Quo Vadis?
SymposiumTalk-02
Presented by: Franziska M. Leipold
Metamemory monitoring is critical for effective control decisions, such as allocating study time. Recent research suggests that making Judgments of Remembering and Knowing (JORKs) instead of Judgments of Learning (JOLs) may enhance monitoring accuracy. While JOLs are confidence ratings of future memory performance typically provided on a percentage scale, JORKs distinguish between recollection (“remember”), familiarity (“know”), and absence of memory (“forget”) on a three-point scale. Prior findings indicate that JORKs yield higher relative accuracy than immediate JOLs and are less influenced by illusionary cues, presumably because they direct attention toward more diagnostic information. The present study aimed to replicate this reported JORK benefit and examine its proposed underlying mechanisms. We found that JORKs mapped differently onto familiarity and recollection processes than JOLs, consistent with theoretical predictions. However, this processing distinction did not translate into higher monitoring accuracy for JORKs. These findings challenge the robustness of the previously reported JORK advantage and indicate that JORKs may not provide a reliable means to enhance metamemory accuracy in research or applied contexts.