When asking the question changes the ultimate answer: Metamemory judgments change memory.

TLDR: The results suggest that judgments of learning are partially constructed in response to the measurement question, and places them in the company of other reactive verbal reporting methods, counseling researchers to consider incorporating control groups, creating alternative scales, and exploring other verbalReporting methods.

Abstract: Self-report measurements are ubiquitous in psychology, but they carry the potential of altering processes they are meant to measure. We assessed whether a common metamemory measure, judgments of learning, can change the ongoing process of memorizing and subsequent memory performance. Judgments of learning are a form of metamemory monitoring described as conscious reflection on one's own memory performance or encoding activities for the purpose of exerting strategic control over one's study and retrieval activities (T. O. Nelson & Narens, 1990). Much of the work examining the conscious monitoring of encoding relies heavily on a paradigm in which participants are asked to estimate the probability that they will recall a given item in a judgment of learning. In 5 experiments, we find effects of measuring judgments of learning on how people allocate their study time to difficult versus easy items, and on what they will recall. These results suggest that judgments of learning are partially constructed in response to the measurement question. The tendency of judgments of learning to alter performance places them in the company of other reactive verbal reporting methods, counseling researchers to consider incorporating control groups, creating alternative scales, and exploring other verbal reporting methods. Less directive methods of accessing participants' metacognition and other judgments should be considered as an alternative to response scales.