Finding the limits of the metacognitive illusion: Utility of font size variations in learning

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2025

Publisher

American Psychological Association

Abstract

Cognitive scientists have examined the unlikely relationship between font size and expectations about memory, finding that large fonts can lead to higher expectations, even when there is no relation between font size and actual memory (e.g., Rhodes & Castel, 2008). Few, if any, studies have examined this metacognitive illusion within multiple-choice practice quizzes featuring feedback, which is a common framework teachers use to assess learning. We tested whether feedback, in which the correct response was shown in a different font size from the distractors, would influence the appearance of this type of illusion. Paired associate learning was studied in participants (N = 100) in 2023–2024. Participants were prompted with a Swahili word and selected the correct English translation from among four options. During feedback, participants saw the correct response in a larger (24 point), same (12 point), or smaller (7.5 point) font size compared to the noncorrect options and then made a judgment of learning for the item. After a 5- min delay, they completed a final test. Overall, participants significantly underestimated their performance on the final test, particularly if they were incorrect in the practice. We found no significant effect of the font size shown during feedback on either judgments of learning or memory. Font size variations seen in this common academic application took a backseat to other cues, such as the feedback itself, suggesting that a metacognitive illusion due to font size, which could be detrimental to learning, may influence learning only in narrow circumstances.

Link to Full Text

Share

COinS