Metacognitive Illusions: A common finding in metamemory research is that individuals will often overestimate their ability to remember studied information on a later test. My research in this area seeks to understand factors driving this effect. One method for studying is this is to have participants make Judgments of Learning (JOLs) while they study, which reflect the likelihood that participants will correctly recall information on a later test. Memory accuracy can then be easily assessed by comparing predicted recall (assessed via JOLs) with later test performance. Overall, when participants study cue-target word pairs, JOLs are generally accurate, particularly when pairs are related (e.g., credit-card). However, flipping the pair order results an marked overestimation effect dubbed the illusion of competence (e.g. backward cue-target associates like card-credit; see Koriat & Bjork, 2005; Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition). My work in this area has sought to explore boundary conditions for the illusion of competence by manipulating JOL timing (immediate vs. delayed JOLs) and the types of study materials (e.g., symmetrical cue-target pairs like on-off which are strongly related regardless of pair order). Additionally, my work explores whether deep encoding strategies (e.g., item-specific and relational encoding) can reduce the illusion of competence by either lowering JOLs to be inline with later recall or improving recall to match participants’ inflated JOLs. Current projects in my lab are investigating whether brief mindfulness interventions can effectively improve the accuracy of metamemory judgments.
Judgment of Learning Reactivity: Because much my work involves having participants rate their ability to remember items while studying, I am particularly interested in whether the act of judging one’s memory at study effects individuals’ ability to remember items. Recent work suggests that JOLs are indeed reactive on memory, such that making these judgments facilitates later remembering, but only under certain conditions (i.e., when participants study related but not unrelated word pairs; see Soderstrom et al., 2015; Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition). Because cue-target relations moderate JOL reactivity, my work explores the degree to which relational encoding contributes to reactivity effects. As such, my work has tested for JOL reactivity on various types of related and unrelated cue target pairs, including backward and symmetrical pairs, and recently, mediated associates (e.g., stripes – lion), which appear unrelated at encoding but are linked via non-presented item. Current lab projects are continuing to explore a relational account of reactivity while also investigating whether reactivity observed with lab-generated materials extends to educational materials.
Big Data Approaches to Cognitive Psychology: While I am primarily interested in exploring learning and memory, much of my work involves presenting participants with lexical stimuli (e.g., word pairs), which they are later tested on. For studies using words as stimuli, it is critical to have accurate measure of word properties to ensure both the validity and replicability of this research. As such, I assisted with the development of a set of semantic feature production norms, which allow for measurement of similarity between concepts (Buchanan, Valentine, & Maxwell, 2019; Behavior Research Methods). Currently, I am spearheading the development of a set of norms which capture perceptual affordances (i.e., actionable properties of objects). Because object use is an important component of meaning, it is important to have an accurate understanding of the various ways individuals perceive they can interact with a given object. However, current measures of meaning have focused more on semantic features and related concepts, rather than explicitly focusing on use-based meaning. When completed, this project will result in a database of affordance norms for 2825 concrete nouns and will provide a starting point for investigating how affordances influence meaning and knowledge acquisition.
Maxwell, N. P., Huff, M. J., Hajnal, A., Namias, J. M., Blau, J. J. C., Day, B., Marsh, K. M., Meagher, B. M., Shelley-Tremblay, J. F., Thomas, G. F., & Wagman, J. B. (In Press). Affordance norms for 2825 concrete nouns. Behavior Research Methods, 1-12. Available at: https://osf.io/68bkt/
Maxwell, N. P., Cates,* E. E., & Huff, M. J. (2024). Item-specific and relational encoding are effective at reducing the illusion of competence. Psychological Research, 88, 1023-1044. Available at: https://osf.io/x9n4f/
Maxwell, N. P. & Huff, M. J. (2024). Judgment of learning reactivity reflects enhanced relational encoding on cued-recall but not recognition tests. Metacognition and Learning, 19(1), 189-113. Available at: https://osf.io/mfbnz/
Maxwell, N. P. & Huff, M. J. (2023). Is discriminability a requirement for reactivity? Comparing the effects of mixed vs. pure list presentations on judgment of learning reactivity. Memory & Cognition, 51(5), 1198-1213. Available at: https://osf.io/3fztn/
Huff, M.J., Maxwell, N. P., & Mitchell, A. (2022). Distinctive Sans Forgetica font does not benefit memory accuracy in the DRM paradigm. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 7(102), 1-12. Available at: https://osf.io/am5rb/
Maxwell, N. P. & Huff, M. J. (2022). Reactivity from judgments of learning is not only due to memory forecasting: Evidence from associative memory and frequency judgments. Metacognition and Learning, 17(2), 589-625. Available at: https://osf.io/8yvn3/
Maxwell, N. P., Huff, M. J., & Buchanan, E. M. (2022). The lrd package: An R package and Shiny application for processing lexical response data. Behavior Research Methods, 54(4), 2001-2024. Available at: https://osf.io/admyx/
Maxwell, N. P., Perry, T., & Huff, M. J. (2022). Perceptually fluent features of study words do not inflate judgments of learning: Evidence from font size, highlights, and Sans Forgetica font type. Metacognition and Learning, 17(2), 293-319. Available at: https://osf.io/3xwdr/.
Namias, J. M., Huff, M. J., Smith, A., & Maxwell, N. P. (2022). Drawing individual images benefits recognition accuracy in the DRM paradigm. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 75(8), 1571-1582. Available at: https://osf.io/r4yh9/
Maxwell, N. P. & Huff, M. J. (2021). The deceptive nature of associative word pairs: Effects of associative direction on judgments of learning. Psychological Research, 85, 1757-1775. Available at: https://osf.io/hvdma/.
Maxwell, N. P. & Buchanan, E. M. (2020). Investigating the interaction of direct and indirect relation on memory judgments and retrieval. Cognitive Processing, 21(1), 41-53. Available at https://osf.io/fcesn/
Bowman, N. A., Miller, A., Woosley, S., Maxwell, N. P., & Kolze, M. J. (2019). Understanding the link between noncognitive attributes and college retention. Research in Higher Education 60(2), 135-152. Available at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11162-018-9508-0
Buchanan, E. M., Valentine, K. D., & Maxwell, N. P. (2019). English semantic feature production norms: An extended database of 4,436 concepts. Behavior Research Methods, 51(4), 1849-1863. Available at: https://osf.io/cjyzw/
Buchanan, E. M., Valentine, K. D., & Maxwell, N. P. (2019). LAB: Linguistic annotated bibliography – A searchable portal for normed database information. Behavior Research Methods, 51(4), 1878 – 1888. Available at: https://osf.io/9bcws/
Pavlacic, J. M., Buchanan, E. M., Maxwell, N. P., Hopke, T., & Schulenberg, S. E. (2019). A meta-analysis of expressive writing on positive psychology variables and traumatic stress. Review of General Psychology, 23(2), 230-250. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1089268019831645