Examining the Roles of Font Size and Presentation Rate in Participants' Judgments of Learning and Memory Performance

3 Literature Review 4 Method 14 Results 19 Discussion 19 References 24 Tables and Figures 26 FONT SIZE AND PRESENTATION RATE 3 Abstract The manipulation of font size and presentation rate of presented stimuli can affect how participants perceive the fluency of the stimuli, which can be observed using judgments of learning (JOLs) and recognition hit rates. The present study manipulated fluency by altering presentation rates (250, 1000, 3000ms) and the font size (small 18 pt and large 48 pt) in which words were presented. Each word presented during the criterion task was presented in either small or large font and at one of the three presentation rates. JOLs were expected to be higher for large font than small font words and the hit rates for small font words were expected to be greater than or equal to those of large font words. For presentation rate, I predicted that both JOLs and hit rates would increase as the presentation rate increased. Participants (N = 42) were instructed to provide a JOL for a future recognition task immediately after studying each word. After studying 72 words, a recognition task asked participants to report whether 96 words (72 studied words and 24 new words) were previously studied or not. The results showed significant effects, as well as interaction effects, for all factors. Small font words received higher JOLs than the predicted large font words. The highest JOLs for presentation rate were given to words presented at 1000 ms, followed by words presented at 3000 ms. Results for hit rates showed thatThe manipulation of font size and presentation rate of presented stimuli can affect how participants perceive the fluency of the stimuli, which can be observed using judgments of learning (JOLs) and recognition hit rates. The present study manipulated fluency by altering presentation rates (250, 1000, 3000ms) and the font size (small 18 pt and large 48 pt) in which words were presented. Each word presented during the criterion task was presented in either small or large font and at one of the three presentation rates. JOLs were expected to be higher for large font than small font words and the hit rates for small font words were expected to be greater than or equal to those of large font words. For presentation rate, I predicted that both JOLs and hit rates would increase as the presentation rate increased. Participants (N = 42) were instructed to provide a JOL for a future recognition task immediately after studying each word. After studying 72 words, a recognition task asked participants to report whether 96 words (72 studied words and 24 new words) were previously studied or not. The results showed significant effects, as well as interaction effects, for all factors. Small font words received higher JOLs than the predicted large font words. The highest JOLs for presentation rate were given to words presented at 1000 ms, followed by words presented at 3000 ms. Results for hit rates showed that large font words were recognized significantly more than small font words and that as the presentation rate increased, so did the hit rates. The results suggest that participants’ beliefs influenced how they approached and encoded the presented words. Future research containing a longer presentation rate is suggested to further explore these findings.