加工流畅性和提取流畅性与学习不良儿童学习判断的关系

The Effects of Encoding Fluency and Retrieval Fluency on Children’s with Learning Disabilities Judgements of Learning

流畅性是个体做学习判断（Judgements of Learning， JOLs）时的重要线索，主要包括加工流畅性和提取流畅性。实验采用联想字对作为实验材料，把做JOLs的时间分为即刻JOLs (Immediate:I)（学习完一个项目立即判断），短时延迟JOLs（Delay condition: D1）和长时延迟JOLs（D2），考察不同JOLs时间条件下，流畅性线索对学习不良儿童和一般儿童的JOLs的不同预测模式。被试为普通小学五年级学习不良和一般儿童各20名，结果发现，一般儿童在I条件下主要利用加工流畅性，在D条件下主要利用提取流畅性做JOLs，而学习不良儿童无论在I还是D条件下均主要利用提取流畅性线索做JOLs。加工流畅性在I条件下效度较高，提取流畅性在D条件下效度较高。

There is much controversy on the psychological mechanism of Judgements of learning (JOLs). Cue-utilization approach proposed by Koriat considers that most of the cues can be grouped into three classes: intrinsic， extrinsic， and mnemonic. Both intrinsic and extrinsic cues may affect JOLs directly， and they may also exert their effect indirectly through their influence on any of the internal， mnemonic cues. The theory can explain successfully the bases or implications of JOLs from a broad perspective， but it can not state the way how individuals make JOLs. Meanwhile， some researchers proposed encoding fluency and retrieval fluency to explain and examine their effects on JOLs during leaning process， which are helpful for researchers to probe into the psychological mechanism of JOLs deeply. In addition， some research focused on children with learning disabilities (LD) found that， compared to their normal peers， lower metacognitive accuracy was one of their important characteristics. However， most of research was descriptive， and can not provide suitable targeted direction for educational practices. According to these， the present study would examine the different effects of different fluency cues on children with LD to find their specific influencial patterns. Twenty children with LD and twenty normal children selected from a common primary school (Mean age = 10.5 years) participated in the experiment to make item-by-item JOLs for paired words presented using a PC. This study examined the effects of encoding fluency (inferred from self-paced study time) and retrieval fluency (inferred from the latency of pre-JOL retrieval) on JOLs， wihch were elicited either immediately after study or after a short or longer delay. Results showed that: (1) Children with LD mainly utilized retrieval fluency to make JOL across immediate and delay conditions. However， for normal children， it showed some distinction between encoding and retrieval fluency as potential cues for JOL across immediate and delay conditions. (2)As a kind of JOLs cues， encoding fluency was more valid than retrieval fluency with immediate JOLs condition， whereas retrieval fluency validity increased with JOLs delay. Based on the above all results， normal children’s JOLs are based on the flexible and adaptive utilization of different mnemonic cues according to their relative validity in predicting their final recall， whereas the cues children’s with LD JOLs based on are not comparably flexible.