Updating metacognitive control in response to expected retention intervals
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 13, 2026

Testing for Metacognitive Responding Using an Odor-based Delayed Match-to-Sample Test in Rats
Published on: June 18, 2018
Joshua L Fiechter1, Aaron S Benjamin2
1University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA. fiechte2@illinois.edu.
Abstract:
In five experiments, we investigated whether expected retention intervals affect subjects' encoding strategies. In the first four experiments, our subjects studied paired associates consisting of words from the Graduate Record Exam and a synonym. They were told to expect a test on a word pair after either a short or a longer interval. Subjects were tested on most pairs after the expected retention interval. For some pairs, however, subjects were tested after the other retention interval, allowing for a comparison of performance at a given retention interval conditional upon the expected retention interval. No effect of the expected retention interval was found for 1 min versus 4 min (Exp. 1), 30 s versus 3 min (Exp. 2), and 30 s versus 10 min (Exps. 3 and 4), even when subjects were given complete control over the pacing of study items (Exp. 4). However, when the difference between the expected retention intervals was increased massively (10 min vs. 24 h; Exp. 5), subjects remembered more items that they expected to be tested sooner, an effect consistent with the idea that they traded off efforts to remember items for the later test versus items that were about to be tested. Overall, this set of results accords with much of the test-expectancy literature, revealing that subjects are often reluctant to adjust encoding strategies on an item-by-item basis, and when they do, they usually make quantitative, rather than qualitative, adjustments.
More Related Videos
07:59Using Practice Testing, Public Speaking, and Source Monitoring to Examine the Influences of Learning Strategies and Stress on Episodic Memory
Published on: June 14, 2019
12:55Multimodal Protocol for Assessing Metacognition and Self-Regulation in Adults with Learning Difficulties
Published on: September 27, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Metacognition
Interference and Decay
Interference occurs when competing memories hinder the retrieval of particular information. It can be classified into two types: proactive and retroactive interference. Proactive...
Self-Regulation
Hindsight Biases
Chunking and Rehearsal in Sensory Memory
Working Memory