A Brain Hack (of sorts) for Exams and Tests - College Info Geek

Summary

This video script discusses the effectiveness of changing exam answers when unsure. Contradicting the 'First-Instinct Fallacy,' it introduces a new method: rating confidence in answers on a scale of 1-5. This technique leverages metacognition, the ability to analyze one's own thinking, to make better-informed decisions on whether to revise answers. The script highlights a study by Justin Couchman, which found that confidence ratings were more accurate predictors of success than post-exam beliefs, suggesting that tracking confidence can help students make more intelligent revisions and potentially achieve better grades.

Takeaways

• 📚 The 'First-Instinct Fallacy' suggests that changing an answer you're unsure of on an exam is often the better choice.
• 🔄 New scientific data can overturn previous advice, prompting a reconsideration of the 'go with your gut' approach.
• 🔑 A new method is proposed: rate your confidence in each answer on a scale of 1 to 5 immediately after answering.
• 🧠 This technique leverages 'metacognition', the ability to think about one's own thinking and analyze personal beliefs and decisions.
• 🐒 Research on Rhesus monkeys showed they could accurately judge their confidence, indicating metacognitive abilities are not exclusive to humans.
• 👨‍🎓 A study by Justin Couchman and colleagues revealed that students often misjudge their exam performance.
• 🤔 The human metacognitive process is imperfect and can be influenced by cognitive biases and heuristics.
• 🧐 Memory unreliability affects metacognitive abilities, especially when analyzing thoughts from the past.
• 📉 In a study, students who rated their confidence on a binary scale (Guess or Known) found revisions were often correct.
• 📈 A second study using a 1-5 scale showed initial answers were more often correct, suggesting confidence tracking can improve decision-making.
• 📈 Assigning a confidence score to each answer can help intelligently decide whether to revise an answer and potentially improve grades.

Q & A

What was the original advice given about changing answers on exams?

The original advice was to go with your gut, based on the idea that your first instinct is usually correct.

What is the First-Instinct Fallacy mentioned in the video?

The First-Instinct Fallacy refers to the misconception that sticking with your initial answer on exams is always better, whereas research shows that changing uncertain answers can often lead to correct outcomes.

What new technique does the video suggest for making decisions during exams?

The new technique involves rating your confidence in each answer on a scale of one to five immediately after answering, to help decide whether to change your answer later.

What is metacognition and how does it relate to the advice given in the video?

Metacognition is the ability to think about one’s own thinking, including analyzing beliefs and decisions. It helps students evaluate their confidence in their answers, leading to better decision-making during exams.

What did the research with Rhesus monkeys show about metacognition?

The research showed that Rhesus monkeys could judge their confidence and indicate when they didn’t know an answer, suggesting that they have metacognitive abilities similar to humans.

Why is metacognition considered imperfect?

Metacognition is imperfect because our memories are unreliable, and our ability to analyze past thoughts and decisions decays over time, making it less effective when trying to judge old thoughts.

What were the results of Couchman's first human study on metacognition?

In the first study, students were more likely to correct their answers accurately if they initially marked them as guesses, and revisions generally improved performance.

What change was made in the second study and what was its outcome?

In the second study, instead of a binary Guess/Known system, participants rated their confidence on a 1-5 scale. The results showed that initial answers were often more accurate than revisions.

How does confidence tracking improve decision-making during exams?

By assigning a confidence score immediately after answering a question, students can use their brain’s metacognitive abilities at their peak, improving the accuracy of decisions on whether to revise an answer.

What are the two key findings from the metacognitive studies mentioned in the video?

First, post-exam beliefs are poor predictors of performance. Second, metacognitive tracking during the exam is a more accurate predictor of success and can help guide answer revisions more effectively.

Outlines

00:00

📚 Revising Exam Answer Strategy

The script discusses a change in the recommended approach to answering exam questions when unsure. Initially, it was suggested to go with one's first instinct, but new research indicates that changing an answer you're unsure about is often a better choice. This is due to the 'First-Instinct Fallacy'. The author introduces a new method involving rating one's confidence in each answer on a scale of one to five, leveraging metacognition, or thinking about thinking. The author's discussion with psychology professor Justin Couchman at Albright College led to insights about metacognition in both humans and Rhesus monkeys. Couchman's research showed that both humans and monkeys can accurately judge their confidence in their answers. However, metacognition is not perfect due to cognitive biases and heuristics. A study conducted by Couchman on human students showed that revisions were more often correct when marked as 'Guess' rather than 'Known'. Another study using a 1-5 scale found that initial answers were more often correct than revisions. This suggests that assigning a confidence score to each question can help make better decisions about whether to revise an answer.

05:00

🎓 Final Exam Confidence and Study Tips

In the second paragraph, the script transitions to discussing the research behind the video and mentions an hour-long podcast with Justin Couchman for further insights. The author also provides links to relevant studies in the blog post. They wish viewers good luck with upcoming exams and tease the next video's topic on creating a study schedule for finals. The script ends with a call to action for viewers to like the video, subscribe for more study tips, and check out the author's book on improving grades. There's also an invitation to read the blog post for a summary and study links, and to connect with the author on social media or through comments.

Keywords

💡First-Instinct Fallacy

The 'First-Instinct Fallacy' refers to the common belief that one's initial answer to a question is usually correct, and changing it may lead to a wrong answer. In the video, this concept is debunked by research suggesting that changing an answer you're unsure of is often the better choice, contrary to the prevailing wisdom of trusting one's gut instinct.

💡Metacognition

Metacognition is the process of thinking about one's own thinking. It involves being aware and in control of one's cognitive processes, such as understanding, learning, and problem-solving. In the video, metacognition is used to explain the technique of rating one's confidence in answers during exams, which helps in making more informed decisions about whether to change an answer or not.

💡Confidence Rating

A 'Confidence Rating' is a self-assessment of how certain one is about the correctness of an answer. In the context of the video, it is suggested that students rate their confidence in each answer on a scale of one to five. This method leverages metacognition to help students decide whether to revise their answers, potentially leading to better exam performance.

💡Cognitive Biases

Cognitive biases are systematic patterns of deviation from rationality in judgment, whereby inferences about other people and situations may be distorted. The video mentions that our metacognitive abilities are not perfect due to cognitive biases, which can affect our memory and decision-making processes, thus impacting our confidence in our answers.

💡Heuristics

Heuristics are mental shortcuts that allow people to make decisions quickly and efficiently. However, as mentioned in the video, these shortcuts can sometimes lead to errors or biases. They are part of the reason why our metacognitive abilities are flawed and why our confidence in our knowledge can be inaccurate.

💡Rhesus Monkeys

Rhesus monkeys are used in a study mentioned in the video to explore the concept of metacognition in animals. The study found that these monkeys could accurately judge their confidence and indicate when they didn't know the answer, demonstrating a form of metacognitive ability similar to humans.

💡Justin Couchman

Justin Couchman is a professor of psychology at Albright College in Pennsylvania, featured in the video. He has conducted research on metacognition, including studies with Rhesus monkeys and human students. His work is central to the video's discussion on the effectiveness of confidence tracking during exams.

💡Study Schedule

A 'Study Schedule' is a plan or timetable for studying, which is briefly mentioned at the end of the video as a topic for a future video. It relates to the video's theme as effective study planning can also contribute to better exam performance, complementing the technique of confidence rating discussed in the video.

💡Revision

Revision, in the context of the video, refers to the act of reviewing and potentially changing an answer after the initial response. The video suggests that tracking confidence can help determine when revisions are likely to be beneficial, based on the findings of the studies discussed.

💡Podcast

A podcast is an audio program that can be downloaded from the internet. The video mentions a podcast with Justin Couchman where the studies on metacognition are discussed in more depth. This provides additional resources for viewers interested in understanding the concepts presented in the video.

💡Blog Post

A blog post is an individual entry or article on a blog. The video mentions a blog post that contains summaries and links to the studies discussed, offering a written resource for further reading and understanding of the video's content.

Highlights

The First-Instinct Fallacy suggests that changing an unsure answer on exams is often the better choice.

Science can prove you wrong, leading to an updated recommendation on changing exam answers.

A new method is suggested: rate your confidence in each answer on a scale of one to five.

Metacognition, or thinking about thinking, is key to this new technique.

Metacognition allows us to judge our confidence in our knowledge.

Justin Couchman's research on metacognition began with studies on Rhesus monkeys.

Monkeys were found to accurately judge their confidence, similar to humans.

Couchman then studied his own students' metacognitive abilities and their exam predictions.

Metacognition is not perfect due to cognitive biases and heuristics.

Memory unreliability affects metacognitive capabilities over time.

Couchman's study on humans used a binary scale for confidence ratings.

Revisions were often correct, especially for answers marked as guesses.

A second test used a 1-5 scale for confidence ratings, showing initial answers were more often correct.

Confidence tracking provides a more sensitive tool for decision-making on exam answers.

Beliefs formed after exams are poor predictors of actual performance.

Metacognitive tracking in the moment is a more accurate predictor of success.

Assigning a confidence score to each answer can help make intelligent revisions and improve grades.

An hour-long podcast with Justin Couchman delves deeper into his study.

Relevant studies are linked in the blog post for further reading.

The technique is suggested for use in upcoming final exams.

Next week's video will discuss how to make a study schedule for finals.

Transcripts

Earlier this year, I made a video

about whether or not you should change

your answers during exams if you're unsure on them.

Now the prevailing wisdom has always been

to go with your gut

but the research we looked at

presented this as what they call

the First-Instinct Fallacy

and showed that more often than not

changing an answer you're unsure of

is more often the better choice.

Now the amazing thing about science

is that at any point in time

new data can come and make you wrong

and that is exactly what has happened to me

because now my initial recommendation for you

is wrong.

And due to that wonderful quality of science,

I now have a new and improved method

to suggest to you

and since I used an ambiguous title for this video,

I'm just going to lay it straight out for you

so I don't waste your time.

Next time you're taking an exam

whether it's your final exams

if you're watching this video near its publish date

or any exam in the future,

right after you answer each question,

you should rate your confidence in that answer

using a scale of one to five.

One being super unconfident I'm not really sure

and five being I definitely know the answer

to this question.

Now this technique takes advantage of something

called metacognition,

which is essentially thinking about thinking.

It's our ability to analyze our own beliefs

and decisions.

To make an analogy,

it illustrates how the brain is a lens

that sees its own flaws.

One of the core aspects of metacognition

is our ability to judge our confidence in our knowledge.

We can feel uncertain

that is we know when we do not know.

I first started learning about metacognition

a couple of months ago

when I talked to a guy named Justin Couchman

who's a professor of psychology

at Albright College in Pennsylvania.

And Couchman's first forays

into the study of metacognition

took the form of research on Rhesus monkeys.

No, not Reese's monkeys but yeah you know.

In a study he helped conduct called

and bear with me because this is a mouthful,

the highs and lows of theoretical interpretation

in animal-metacognition research.

He and two other psychology professors

set up to see if animals have the same

metacognitive capabilities that we have.

In their study, the monkeys were given

questions of varying levels of difficulty

and they had to either give an answer

or indicate that they didn't know the answer.

And Couchman and the other professors

were surprised to find out that the monkeys

were able to accurately judge their confidence

and indicate when they didn't know.

They were able to look inside their brains

and analyze their own thinking much like we do.

With the results of this study in hand,

Couchman started thinking about

the metacognitive abilities of his own students

who were often surprised that the grades on their exams

were often much higher or lower

than they initially predicted.

And it turns out there is a reason for this.

The problem with metacognition

is that it isn't perfect.

I use the analogy of a lens that sees its own flaws

for a reason.

Our brains are subject to all kinds of bugs,

cognitive biases, heuristics,

flawed modes of thinking

like to quote the AI researcher,

Eliezer Yudkowsky.

"The brain is a flawed lens through which to see reality.

"This is true of both mouse brains and human brains

"but a human brain is a flawed lens

"that can understand its own flaws-

"its systematic errors, its biases-

"and apply second-order corrections to them."

One of the biggest flaws is that

our memories are notoriously unreliable

and as a result our metacognitive capabilities

decay as we try to use them

to analyze thoughts that we had

further and further in the past.

So to learn more about this,

Couchman decided to conduct another study.

This time on humans rather than monkeys

and they set up two different tests.

In the first tests,

they had students take a real life multiple choice exam

but after each question,

they asked them to rate their confidence

on a binary scale.

Either writing G or K for Guess or Known.

Additionally the asked the participants

to indicate whether or not

they had revised each answer

after giving an initial answer.

And for this first test,

they found that revisions were more

often than not, correct

especially for the answers that were marked

Guess rather than Known.

After this first test,

they decided to conduct a second test

and the only difference here

was that instead of using a binary rating system,

Guess or Known,

they decided to have the students

rate their confidence on each question

using a 1-5 Scale.

One being super unconfident

and five being almost certain.

And the results here were interesting

because in this case

the initial answers were more often correct

than the revisions.

Now these results would seem contradictory

and that would be the case

if there were only one rule of thumb,

either stick with your initial answer

go with your gut

or as the previous research showed,

revisions are better.

But using confidence tracking,

there's no longer just one rule of thumb.

When you assign a confidence score

to each question in the moment

that you answer it,

you're utilizing your brain's metacognitive abilities

at their most accurate point

giving your brain a more sensitive tool

with which to make a decision.

So to wrap up here,

there were two key findings to that study.

Number one,

beliefs formed about the exams

after the exams were over

were very very poor predictors of actual performance

and this shouldn't come as a surprise.

I remember myself going into many exams

as a student super confident

that I was going to do awesome

and then i got a bunch of questions wrong

or on the other hand,

being really worried that I wasn't ready

and then just absolutely acing it

and I'm sure you've had these experiences as well

but more importantly,

metacognitive tracking in the moment

was a much more accurate predictor of success

and gave the students a more accurate tool

for judging whether or not

they should make a revision to an answer.

So there you have it.

When you go into your next final exam

or any exam in the future,

try assigning a confidence score

next to each answer

as you answer that question.

Doing so will help you to more intelligently

make revisions and hopefully get better grades.

Now if you're curious and you'd like to know more

about the research that went into this video,

I did an hour long podcast with Justin Couchman

where we went more in depth in his study

and you can click the card right now

wherever it is or down below to listen to it

and I've also linked all the relevant studies

in the blog post for this video.

That's all I've got for you this week

so if you're watching this

and you've got a final coming up pretty soon,

best of luck on it

and hopefully this technique will help you out

and in next week's video,

we'll be talking about an often requested topic,

how to make a study schedule for finals.

So look forward to that

and as always, thanks for watching.

Hey guys, thanks so much for watching this video.

If you enjoyed it,

giving it a like can definitely help this channel out

and also if you want to get

more study tips every single week,

you can hit that big red subscribe button right there.

In addition, I also wrote a book

on how to get better grades and I made three

so if you'd like a copy of it

click the picture right there.

If you want to read the summary

and get links to all those studies,

hit the orange button to go to the blog post

and if you missed last week's video,

we talked about 15 writing apps

that can help you become a better writer.

Lastly, if you want to connect

I'm @TomFrankly on Instagram and Twitter

or you can leave a comment down below.