Description:
<jats:p><p style="text-indent: 1.5cm; margin-top: 0.4cm; margin-bottom: 0cm; line-height: 200%; widows: 2; orphans: 2;" align="JUSTIFY"><span style="color: #000000;"><span style="font-family: Arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;">To assess <em>judgment of learning</em> (JOL) accuracy in metamemory, researchers have to measure how much the metamemory judgments adjust to the participant's memory-test performance. Absolute accuracy or <em>calibration</em> is the average correspondence between JOL and memory performance. Metamemory relative accuracy or <em>resolution</em> is a measure of how sensitive a participant is to the differential recallability between two studied items. Unfortunately, factors altering both calibration and resolution very often change also the distribution of JOL on the available scale for judgment. The problem with these effects on JOL distribution is that they could yield an altered resolution estimation due to the way in which its usual estimate is computed. <em>JOLer</em> simulates the behavior of participants in a typical metamemory procedure. The application is offered as a tool for metamemory researchers: it affords the opportunity to check whether, maintaining calibration parameters but changing JOL distributions between conditions, a different (and somewhat spurious) resolution estimate would be obtained.</span></span></span></p></jats:p>